ouubuiiiuai i^uuiuei, ucLaabc an ouuiuuaiy uuu^o ^iuiJofthe three principal Substances, Sal, Sulphur, and Mercury

System (srstem). Also 7-8 systeme, !

ai8tem(e. [ad. late L. systetna musical interval

in mecL or mod.L., the universe, body of th

articles of faith, a. Gr. avarrjfia organized wholegovernment, constitution , a body of men or animals

• 4~\a »^r t 4~^a ran f^ hi wm~ ~h~. a~\a*Ull metrAiinto

ramAolset u

fj w^i'ji* ^»«;//^|(i664, ' le systemHlz..|arriiimL, Sp.|*|//L, P^

syfkfn, effb.]M-M ^i-"- -- V/

L An organized or connected group of objects.

1. A set or assemblage of things connectedassociated, or interdependent, so as to form :

:omplex unity; a whole composed of parts ii

gto s

eqrls

•sTitties (iS

Cf yeare is a

et

meblag

ns lif

f four

Systemic (siste-mik), a. [irreg. f. System 4

ic; used for differentiation of meaning instead

the regular systematic]1. Physiol, and Path. Belonging to, supplying

--a ^ m

^

% •

in every sentence. 1865 Tylor Early Hist. Matt. L 2

systematic treatise on the subject.

3. gen. Arranged or conducted according to

system, plan, or organized method ; involvingobserving a system

;(of a person) acting accordin

:o system, regular and methodical.1790 Burke Rev. France 84 These gentlemen value then

pelves on being systematic, 1706 — Regie. Peace ii. Wk

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2011 with funding from

Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum Library and Archives

http://www.archive.org/details/systemicpaintingOOallo

SYSTEMIC

PAINTING

THE SOLOMON R. GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM. NEW YORK

Published by The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, New York, 1966 All Rights Reserved

Library of Congress Card Catalogue Number: 66-20425 Printed in The Netherlands

THE SOLOMON It. GUGtiGMIKIM l'Or.MIATION

TRUSTEES

HARRY !". GVGGENHEIM, I'HKSinKNT

ALBERT !•:. THIELE, VICE PRESIDENT

II. II. ARNASON, VICK PRESIDENT, ART ADMIMSTKATIO.N

PETER O. LAWSON-JOHNSTON, VICK PRESIDENT, BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

ELEANOR, COINTESS f'ASTJ.E STEWART

DANA DRAPER

A. CHAINCEY XKWI.IX

MRS, HENRY OBR]

DANIEL CATTON RICH

MICHAEL F. WETTACH

MEDLEY <i. II. WHEI.PLEY

CAUL ZICROSSKH

Exhibitions at the Guggenheim Museum in recent years,

have been concerned most often with the creative con-

tribution of a single artist. At times, the source, in form

of an already existing collection, would determine an

exhibition's scope. Surveys of painting in a particular

region, or worldwide assessment within a particular

period have also been held at this museum from time

to time. The current show avoids all these categories by

aiming, instead, to isolate a recognizable visual pheno-

menon and to pursue, in the subsequent catalogue pages,

its specific meaning.

The exhibition of "Systemic Painting" has been assem-

bled by Lawrence Alloway, the Guggenheim Museum's

curator.

Thomas M. Messer, Director

LENDERS TO THE EXHIBITION

Steve Schapiro, Brooklyn Heights, Neiv York

Mr. and Mrs. Robert Scull, New York.

Bykert Gallery, New York

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York

Galerie Chalette, New York

Robert Elkon Gallery, New York

Andre Emmerich Gallery, New York

Fischbach Gallery, New York

Sidney Janis Gallery, New York

Kornblee Gallery, New York

Pace Gallery, New York

Park Place Gallery, New York

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York

Stephen Radich Gallery, New York

A. M. Sachs Gallery, Neiv York

Allan Stone Gallery, New York

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks are due to the Galerie Chalette, Andre Emmerich Gallery,

Kornblee Gallery, and the Pace Galleryforpaying the cost of colorplates.

Mary Grigoriadis worked closely with me on everyphase of the exhibition,

including the preparation ofa working bibliography, which was completed

by Diane Waldman. The catalogue ivas edited by Linda Konheim and

Susan Tumarkin. I am grateful for their collaboration and support.

L.A.

11

INTRODUCTION

The painting that made American art famous, done mostly in New York between

1947 and 1954, first appeared as a drama of creativity. The improvisatory capacity of the artist

was enlarged and the materiality of media stressed. The process-record of the creative act

dominated all other possibilities of art and was boosted by Harold Rosenberg's term Action

Painting. This phrase, though written with de Kooning in mind, was not announced as such,

and it got stretched to cover new American abstract art in general. The other popular term,

Abstract Expressionism, shares with "action" a similar over-emphasis on work-procedures,

defining the work of art as a seismic record of the artist's anxiety. However, within this period,

there were painters who never fitted the lore of violence that surrounded American art. The

work of Clyfford Still, Barnett Newman, and Mark Rothko was clearly not offering revelatory

brushwork with autobiographical implications. Not only that, but an artist like Pollock, who

in his own time, seemed all audacious gesture, appears very differently now. His large drip

paintings of 1950 have been, as it were, de-gesturized by a few years passing: what once looked

like impulsive directional tracks have condensed into unitary fields of color. This all-over

distribution of emphasis and the consequent pulverizing of hierarchic form relates Pollock to

Still, Newman, and Rothko.

Meyer Shapiro compared the non-expressionistic, non-gestural painting of Rothko to

"an all-pervading, as if internalized, sensation of dominant color"1

. Later H. H. Arnason

proposed the term Abstract Imagist for those artists who were not expressionist (7)*. This is a

recognition of the fact that the unity of Action Painting and Abstract Expressionism was purely

verbal, a product of generalization from incomplete data. (Obviously, any generalizations are

subject to scepticism, revision, and reversal, but these two terms seem especially perfunctory.)

It is the "sensational", the "Imagist", painters who have been ratified by the work of younger

artists. Dissatisfaction with the expressionist bulk of New York painting was expressed by the

number of young painters who turned away from gestural art or never entered it. Jasper Johns

targets from 1955, Noland's circles from late 1958, and Stella's symmetrical black paintings of

1958-59 are, it can now be seen, significant shifts from the directional brushwork and projected

anxiety of the Expressionists. Rauschenberg's twin paintings. Factum I and Factum II, 1957,

along with duplicated photographs, included almost identical paint splashes and trickles, an

ironic and loaded image. A gestural mark was turned into a repeatable object. The changing

situation can be well indicated by the opinions of William Rubin six years ago : he not only

deplored "the poor quality of 'de Kooning style painting' ", he also assumed the failure of de

Kooning himself and praised Clement Greenberg's "prophetic insight" in foreseeing the

expressionist cul-de-sac (3). It is symptomatic that three years later Ben Heller stated, "the

widespread interest in de Kooning's ideas has been more of a hindrance than a help to the

younger artists" (14). In fact, it was now possible for Heller to refer to "the post-de Kooning

world" (my italics). In the late 50's de Kooning's example was oppressively accepted and

alternatives to it were only fragmentarily visible. There was, 1. the work of the older Field

painters, 2. the development of stained as opposed to brushed techniques (Pollock 1951.

Frankenthaler 1952. Louis 1954), and, 3. the mounting interest in symmetrical as opposed to

amorphous formats, clear color as opposed to dirty, hard edges as opposed to dragged ones.

* Numbers in parentheses refer to the bibliography.

12

Barnett Newman. EVE. 1950. Oil on canvas, 96 x 68".

•^*5-

Barnett Newman's paintings have

hail two different audiences: first the com-

pact group of admirers of his exhibitions in

New York in 1950 and 1951. Second, the

large audience of the later 50's, with the shift

of sensibility away from gestural art. As with

any artist who is called "ahead of his time"

he has a complex relation with subsequent

history. On the one hand he has created his

own audience and influenced younger artists

;

on the other hand, his art was waited for.

There was talk and speculation about New-

man even among artists who had not seen

his work. New:man asserted the wholistic

character of painting with a rigour previously

unknown; his paintings could not be seen

or analyzed in terms of small parts. There

are no subdivisions or placement problems;

the total field is the unit of meaning. The

expressionist element in Still (who signed

himself Clyfford in emulation of the Vincent

signature of Van Gogh) and the seductive

air of Rothko, despite their sense of space

as field, meant less to a new generation of

artists than Newman's even but not polished,

brushed but not ostentatious, paint surface.

In addition, the narrow canvases he painted

in 1951. a few inches wide and closely related

in height to a man's size, prefigure the de-

velopment of the shaped canvas ten years

later. Greenberg, considering the structural

principles of Newman's painting in the ab-

sence of internal divisions and the interplay

of contrasted forms, suggested that his ver-

tical bands are a "parody" of the frame.

"Newman's picture becomes all frame in it-

self", because "the picture edge is repeated

inside, and makes the picture instead of

merely being echoed'' 2. This idea was later

blowm up by Michael Fried into deductive

structure (40) and applied to Frank Stella's

paintings in which the stretcher, as a whole,

not just the sides, sets the limits for the de-

velopment of the surface 3. Although this idea

is not central to the paintings of Newman, it

is indicative of his continuous presence on

the scene in the 60's that a proposed es-

thetic should rest, at least partially, on his

work.

Barnett Newman Exhibition, Betty Parsons Gallery, 1951. Left original plaster cast at Here, right The Wild, 1950.

13

X~

^^J"4.

Alternatives to Abstract Expres-

sionism were not easily come by in the 50's

and had to be formulated experimentally by

artists on their own. Leon Smith, who had

already suppressed modelling and textural

variation in his painting, studied in 1954,

the stitching patterns on drawings of tennis

balls, footballs, and basketballs. These im-

ages laid the foundations of his continuous,

flowing space, both in tondos, close to the

original balls, and transferred to rectangular

canvases. In France, Ellsworth Kelly made

a series of panel paintings, in which each

panel carried a single solid color. There is

an echo of Neo-plastic pinks and blues in his

palette, but his rejection of visual variation

or contrast was drastically fresh, at the time,

1952-53. Ad Reinhardt, after 1952 painted

all red and all blue pictures on a strictly

symmetrical lay-out, combining elements

from early 20th century geometric art and

mid-century Field painting (saturated or

close-valued color). These three artists de-

monstrate an unexpected reconciliation of

geometric art, as structural precision, and

recent American painting, as colorist inten-

sity. They showed at Betty Parsons Gallery

and her adjunct Section Eleven, 1958-61,

along with Alexander Liberman, Agnes Mar-

tin, and Sidney Wolfson. It is to this phase

of non-expressionistic New York painting

that the term Hard Edge applies. "The

phrase 'hard-edge' is an invention of the Ca-

lifornia critic, Jules Langsner, who suggested

Leon Smith. Drawing1954. 8i x 3f.

Pencil and ink on cardboard,

Ellsworth Kelly. Red Yellow Black Wr

hites Blues. 1953. Synthetic paint on canvas. 7 panels, each 41 i x 22*

14

it at a gathering in Claremont in 1959 as a title for an exhibition of four non-figurative Cali-

fornia painters" 4 records George Rickey. In fact. Langsner originally intended the term to refer

to geometric abstract art in general, because of the ambiguity of the term "geometric", as he told

me in conversation in 1958. Incidentally, the exhibition Rickey refers to was called eventuallv

Four Abstract Classicists. The purpose of the term, as I used it 1959-60, was to refer to the

new development which combined economy of form and neatness of surface with fullness of

color, without continually raising memories of earlier geometric art. It was a way of stressing

the wholistic properties of both the big asymmetrical shapes of Smith and Kelly and the

symmetrical layouts of Liberman and Martin.

Hard Edge was defined in opposition to geometric art. in the following way. "The

'cone, cylinder, and sphere' of Cezanne-fame have persisted in much 20th century painting.

Even where these forms are not purely represented, abstract artists have tended toward a

compilation of separable elements. Form has been treated as discrete entities", whereas "forms

are few in hard-edge and the surface immaculate . . . The whole picture becomes the unit: forms

extend the length of the painting or are restricted to two or three tones. The result of this

sparseness is that the spatial effect of figures on a field is avoided" (5). This wholistic organization

is the difference that Field Painting had made to the formal resources of geometric art 5. The

fundamental article on this phase of the development of systemic painting is Sidney Tillim"s

early "W hat Happened to Geometry?", in which he formulated the situation in terms of

geometric art "in the shadow of abstract expressionism" (2).

The emerging non-expressionist tendencies were often complimented as Timeless

Form's latest embodiment, as in the West Coast group of Abstract Classicists. Jules Langsner

defined Abstract Classicism as form that is "defined, explicit, ponderable, rather than ambigu-

ous or fuzzily suggestive", and equated this description with the "enduring principles of

Classicism" 6. It is a tribute to the prestige of the Expressionist-Action cluster of ideas that it

was assumed any artist who did not belong there must, of necessity, be a classicist. Langsner

wrote in 1959 but, as late as 1964, E. C. Goossen could refer, when discussing symmetry, to its

"underlying classical conventions" (86). \^ hereas Mondrian and Malewitch. in the formative

period of their ideas, believed in absolute formal standards, of the kind a definition of Classicism

requires. American artists had more alternatives. The 1903-13 generation, by stressing the

existential presence of the artist in his work, had sealed off the strategies of impersonality and

timelessness by which earlier artists had defined and defended their work. Now. because of the

intervening generation of exploratory artists, the systematic and the patient could be regarded

as no less idiosyncratic and human than the gestural and cathartic. Only defenders of the idea

of classicism in modern life resisted this idea of the arbitrariness of the systemic.

Alexander Liberman

produced paintings in which the

immaculate finish associated

with international geometric art

was taken up to a physical scale

and fullness comparable to the

work of the 1903-13 generation

of Americans. The completeness

of symmetry, in his paintings of

1950. the random activation of

a field without gestural traces in

1953. are remarkably early. Asymmetrical and immaculate

painting of his was seen at the

Guggenheim Museum in 1951.

where its total absence of touch

was remarked on by, among

Alexander Liberman. Diptych. One 11 ay. L950. . 4i x 80".

Alexander Liberman. 639. 1959. 49i x 98s

others, Johns and Rauschenberg. Several of Liberman's paintings of this period were designed

by him and executed by workmen, an anticipation of much later practice. Here is a real link with

Malewitch, incidentally, though not one likely to have occured to Liberman at the time; in Male-

witch's book The Non-Objective World, his Suprematist compositions are rendered by pencil

drawings, not by reproductions of paintings. The conceptual act of the artist, that is to say,

not his physical engagement with a medium, is the central issue. Ad Reinhardt, after working

as a traditional geometric artist, began his symmetrical, one-color paintings in 1953, which

darkened progressively through the 50's, culminating in 1960 in the series of identical black

squares. His numerous statements, dramatic but flamboyant, in catalogues or even in Action

Painting-oriented Art News, were well known. "No accidents or automatism"; "Everything,

where to begin and where to end, should be worked out in the mind beforehand" ; "No symbols,

images, or signs" 7 are characteristic, and prophetic (the date is 1957).

It is not necessary to believe in the historical succession of styles, one irrevocably

displacing its predecessor, to see that a shift of sensibility had occurred. In the most extreme

view, this shift destroyed gestural painting; in a less radical view, it at least expanded artists'

possible choices in mid-century New York, restoring multiplicity. Newman's celebrated ex-

hibition at Bennington College in 1958 was repeated in New York the following year, and the

echoes of his work were immense. In 1960 Noland's circles which had been somewhat gestural

in handling, became more tight and, as a result, the dyed color became disembodied, without

hints of modelling or textural variation. Stella's series of copper paintings in 1961 were far more

elaborately shaped than the notched paintings of the preceeding year; now the stretchers were

like huge initial letters. In 1962 Poons painted his first paintings in which fields of color were

inflected by small discs of color; Noland painted his first chevrons, in which the edges of the

canvas, as well as the center, which had been stressed in the circles, became structurally

important; and Downing, influenced he has said by Noland. painted his grids of two-color dots.

In 1963 Stella produced his series of elaborately cut-out purple paintings and Neil \S illiams

made his series of saw-tooth edged shaped-canvases. Other examples could be cited, but

enough is recorded to show the momentum and diversity of the new sensibility.

A series of museum exhibitions reveals an increasing self-awareness among the artists

which made possible group appearances and public recognition of the changed sensibility. The

first of these exhibitions was Toward a New Abstraction (The Jewish Museum, Summer 1963)

in which Ben Heller proposed, as a central characteristic of the artists, "a conceptual approach

to painting" (14). In the following year there was Post Painterly Abstraction (The Los Angeles

County Museum of Art, Spring) in which Clement Greenberg proposed that the artists included

in the show revealed a "move towards a physical openness of design, or towards linear clarity,

or towards both" (23a). Heller and Creenberg, the former no doubt affected by Greenberg's

earlier writing, were anti-expressionist. In the fall of 1964 The Hudson River Museum put on

a significant though at the time little noticed exhibition of 8 Young Artists* among them

Robert Barry and Robert Huot. E. C. Goossen described the group characteristics as follows:

16

"none of them employs illusion, realism, or anything that could possibly be described as

symbolism" and stressed the artists' "concern with conceptual order" (28). Noland occupied

half the U.S. Pavillion at the Venice Biennale in 1964 and had a near retrospective at The

Jewish Museum in the following year. In the summer of 1965 the Washington Gallery of

Modern Art presented The Washington Color Painters, which included Noland. Downing and

Mehring. Finally, in the spring, 1966 The Jewish Museum put on a sculpture exhibition.

Primary Structures 9. This list of museum exhibitions shows that critical and public interest

in the early 60's had left Abstract Expressionism, and the main area of abstract art on which

it now concentrated can be identified with Clement Greenberg's esthetics.

Greenberg's Post Painterly Abstraction was notable as a consolidation of the null-

expressionist tendencies so open in this critic's later work. He sought an historical logic for

"clarity and openness" in painting by taking the cyclic theory7 of W olfflin, according to which

painterly and linear styles alternate in cycles. Translated into present requirements, Abstract

Expressionism figures as painterly, now degenerated into mannerism, and more recent develop-

ments are equated with the linear. These criteria are so permissive as to absorb Frankenthaler's

and Olitski's free-form improvisation and atmospheric color, on the one hand, and Feeley's and

Stella's uninflected systemic painting as well. It is all Post Painterly Abstraction, a term

certainly adapted from Roger Fry's Post-Impressionism, which similarly lumped together

painters as antithetical as Van Gogh, Gauguin, Seurat. and Cezanne. The core of Post Painterly

Abstraction is a technical procedure, the staining of canvas to obtain color uninterrupted by

pressures of the hand or the operational limits of brush work. Poured paint exists purely as

color, "freed" of drawing and modelling; hence the term Color Painting for stain paintingg

.

It is characteristic of criticism preoccupied with formal matters that it should give a movement

a name derived from a technical constituent. The question arises : are other, less narrow, descrip-

tions of post-expressionist art possible than that proposed by Greenberg? It is important to go

into this because his influence is extensive, unlike that of Harold Rosenberg (associated with

Action Painting), but there is a ceiling to Greenberg's esthetic which must be faced.

The basic text in Greenberg-influenced criticism is an article, written after the publica-

tion of Art and Culture, but on which the essays in his book rest, called "Modernist Painting" 10.

Here he argues for self-criticism within each art. "through the procedures themselves of that

which is being criticized". Thus "flatness, two-dimensionality, was the only condition shared

with no other art, and so modernist painting oriented itself to flatness". This idea has been

elaborated by Michael Fried as a concentration on "problems intrinsic to painting itself" (40).

This idea of art's autonomy descends from 19th-century estheticism. "As the laws of their Art

were revealed to them (artists), they saw, in the development of their work, that real beauty

which, to them, was as much a matter of certainty and triumph as is to the astronomer the

verification of the result, foreseen with the light given to him alone" 11. Here Whistler states

clearly the idea of medium purity as operational self-criticism, on which American formalist art

criticism still rests. Whistler typifies the first of three phases of art for art's sake theory: first,

the precious and, at the time, highly original estheticism of W alter Pater, W lustier, and W ilde;

second, a classicizing of this view in the early 20th century, especially by Roger Fry, stressing

form and plasticity with a new sobriety; and, third, Greenberg's zeal for flatness and color, with

a corresponding neglect of non-physiognomic elements in art.

W hat is missing from the formalist approach to painting is a serious desire to study

meanings beyond the purely visual configuration. Consider the following opinions, all of them

formalist-hased. which acknowledge or suppose the existence of meanings feelings. Ben Heller

writes that Noland "has created not only an optical but an expressive art" (14) ami Michael

Fried calls Noland's paintings "powerful emotional statements" (40). However, neither writer

indicated what was expressed nor what emotions might be stated. Alan Solomon has written of

17

Noland's circles, which earlier he had called "targets" (14) : "some are buoyant and cheerful . .

.

others are sombre, brooding, tense, introspective" (228), but this "sometimes-I'm happy,

sometimes-I'm blue" interpretation is less than one hopes for. It amounts to a reading of color

and concentric density as symbols of emotional states, which takes us back to the early 20th-

century belief in emotional transmission by color-coding.

According to Greenberg the Hard-Edge artists in his Post Painterly Abstraction

exhibition "are included because they have won their 'hardness' from the softness of Painterly

Abstraction" (23a). It is certainly true that "a good part of the reaction against Abstract Expres-

sionism is... a continuation of it", but to say of the artists, "they have not inherited it (the

hard edge) from Mondrian, the Bauhaus, Suprematism. or anything that came before", is

exaggerating. Since Greenberg believes in evolutionary ideas, and his proposal that Hard-Edge

artists come out of gestural ones shows that he does, it is unreasonable to sever the later artists

from the renewed contact with geometric abstract art which clearly exists. If we omit Green-

berg's improvisatory painters, such as Francis, Frankenthaler, Louis, and Olitski, and attend

to the more systemic artists, there are definite connections to earlier geometric art. Kelly,

Smith, and Poons had roots in earlier geometric art, for example, and it is hard to isolate

modular painting in New York from international abstract art. What seems relevant now is to

define systems in art, free of classicism, which is to say free of the absolutes which were

previously associated with ideas of order. Thus, the status of order as human proposals rather

than as the echo of fundamental principles, is part of the legacy of the 1903-1915 generation.

Their emphasis on the artist as a human being at work, however much it led, in one direction

to autobiographical gestures, lessened the prestige of art as a mirror of the absolute. Malewitch,

Kandinsky, and Mondrian, in different ways, universalized their art by theory, but in New York

there is little reliance on Platonic or Pythagorian mysteries. A system is as human as a splash

of paint, more so when the splash gets routinized.

Definitions of art as an object, in relation to geometric art, have too often consolidated

it within the web of formal relations. The internal structure, purified of all reference, became

the essence of art. The object quality of art is stressed in shaped canvas paintings, but without a

corresponding appeal to idealism. When the traditional rectangle is bitten into or thrust out-

wards, the spectator obviously has an increased consciousness of the ambience. The wall may

appear at the center of the painting or intersect the painted surface. Despite the environmental

space of the shaped canvas, however, it has also a great internal solidity, usually emphasized by

thick stretchers (Stella, Williams). The bulk of the painting is physical and awkward, not a pure

essence of art. On the contrary, the contoured edges are highly ambiguous: the balance of

internal and outside space is kept in suspense so that there are connections with painting (color),

sculpture (real volume and shaping), and craft (the basic carpentry). Shaped canvases tend to

mix these possibilities. Another non-formal approach is indicated by Robert Smithson's

reaction to Stella's "impure-purist surface", especially the purple, green, and silver series:

"like Mallarme's Herodiade, these surfaces disclose a 'cold scintillation' ; they seem to 'love

the horror of being virgin' " (60). Mallarme is being quoted, not to take possession of the work in

literary terms, but to indicate experiences beyond the eyeball. It is a reminder that shaped

blocks of one color have the power of touching emotion and memory at the same time that they

are being seen.

Stella's recent paintings (started in the fall of 1965 from drawings made in 1962) are

asymmetrical and multi-colored, compared to the symmetrical and/or one-color paintings done

since 1958. The change is not a move to a world full of possibilities from one that was con-

stricted. Simplicity is as sustaining in art as elaboration. It is more probable that the new work

is prompted aggressively, as a renewal of the problematic, for the style change came at a time

when an esthetic for minimal, cool, or ABC art (to which his earlier work is central), was out in

18

the open. The new paintings are a kind of two-level image, with the contoured stretcher pro-

viding one kind of definition and the painted forms, cued by the stretcher but not bound to it,

making another. Color is bounded by painted bands or by the edge of the canvas, which has the

effect of scrambling the spatial levels of the painting. This act of superposition disregards the

idea of deductive structure which Michael Fried proposed as the present historical necessity of

"modernist" painting in which the painted image is obedient to the shape of the perimeter. Each

of Stella's new shaped canvases exists in four permutations, with alternate colors though with

fixed boundaries.

Kenneth Noland painted a series of square canvases in 1964, a shape that is more in

use now than at any other time in the 20th century. Presumably its non-directional character,

with neither east-west nor north-south axes, accounts for its currency. However, Noland, who

laid in bars of color parallel to the sides of his squares, was oppressed by the sense of the edge.

For this reason he turned the squares 45°, making them diamonds; this led him to the long

diamond format, of which one is in the present exhibition. The points of the diamond are the

farthest points from the center, a format which frees Noland from his sense of confinement by

the edge. The edge is reduced to a functional oblique, linking the most distant parts of the

painting. Thus, the diamond format is not so much a shaped canvas, with consequent connec-

tions to the pictorial and to the object-like, but the discovery of a format highly suited to the

"disembodied" color effects of staining.

The essentializing moves made by Newman to reduce the formal complexity of the

elements in painting to large areas of a single color, have an extraordinary importance. The

paintings are a saddle-point between art predicated on expression and art as an object. New-

man's recently completed Stations of the Cross represent both levels: the theme is the Passion

of Christ, but each Station is apparently non-iconographical, a strict minimal statement. Levels

of reference and display, present in all art, are presented not in easy partnership but almost

antagonistically. When we view art as an object we view it in opposition to the process of

signification. Meaning follows from the presence of the work of art, not from its capacity to

signify absent events or values (a landscape, the Passion, or whatever). This does not mean we

are faced with an art of nothingness or boredom as has been said with boring frequency. On the

contrary, it suggests that the experience of meaning has to be sought in other ways.

First is the fact that paintings, such as those in this exhibition are not, as has been

often claimed, impersonal. The personal is not expunged by using a neat technique; anonymity

is not a consequence of highly finishing a painting. The artist's conceptual order is just as

personal as autographic tracks. Marcel Duchamp reduced the creative act to choice and we may

consider this its irreducible personal requirement. Choice sets the limits of the system, regard-

less of how much or how little manual evidence is carried by the painting. Second is the fact

that formal complexity is not an index of richness of content. "I am using the same basic

composition over and over again", Howard Mehring has said, "I never seem to exhaust its

possibilities" (218). A third related point is that most of the artists in this exhibition work in

runs, groups, or periods. The work that constitutes such runs or periods is often less outwardly

diverse than, say, the work of other artists' periods.

A possible term for the repeated use of a configuration is One Image art (noting that

legible repetition requires a fairly simple form). Examples are Noland's chevrons, Downing's

grids, Feeley's quatrefoils, and Reinhardt's crosses. The artist who uses a given form begins each

painting further along, deeper into the process, than an expressionist, who is, in theory at least,

lost in each beginning; all the One Image artist has to have done is to have painted his earlier

work. One Image art abolishes the lingering notion of History Painting that invention is the

19

test of the artist. Here form becomes meaningful, not because of ingenuity or surprise, but

because of repetition and extension. The recurrent image is subject to continuous transforma-

tion, destruction and reconstruction ; it requires to be read in time as well as in space. In style

analysis we look for unity within variety; in One Image art we look for variety within con-

spicuous unity. The run of the image constitutes a system, with limits set up by the artist him-

self, which we learn empirically by seeing enough of the work. Thus the system is the means by

which we approach the work of art. When a work of art is defined as an object we clearly stress

its materiality and factualness, but its repetition, on this basis, returns meaning to the syntax.

Possibly, therefore, the evasiveness about meaning in Noland already mentioned, may have to

do with the expectation that a meaning is complete in each single painting rather than located

over a run or a set.

The application of the term systemic to One Image painting is obvious, but, in fact,

it is applied more widely here. It refers to paintings which consist of a single field of color, or

to groups of such paintings. Paintings based on modules are included, with the grid either

contained in a rectangle or expanding to take in parts of the surrounding space (Gourfain and

Insley respectively). It refers to painters who work in a much freer manner, but who end up

with either a wholistic area or a reduced number of colors (Held and Youngerman respec-

tively). The field and the module (with its serial potential as an extendable grid) have in

common a level of organization that precludes breaking the system. This organization does not

function as the invisible servicing of the work of art, but is the visible skin. It is not, that is to

say, an underlying composition, but a factual display. In all these works, the end-state of the

painting is known prior to completion (unlike the theory of Abstract Expressionism). This does

not exclude empirical modifications of a work in progress, but it does focus them within a

system. A system is an organized whole, the parts of which demonstrate some regularities.

A system is not antithetical to the values suggested by such art world word-clusters as humanist,

organic, and process. On the contrary, while the artist is engaged with it, a system is a process

;

trial and error, instead of being incorporated into the painting, occur off the canvas. The

predictive power of the artist, minimized by the prestige of gestural painting, is strongly

operative, from ideas and early sketches, to the ordering of exactly scaled and shaped stretchers

and help by assistants.

The spread of Pop Art in the 60's coincides with the development of systemic abstract

painting and there are parallels. Frank Stella's paintings, with their bilateral symmetry, have

as much in common with Johns' targets as with Reinhardt and, if this is so, his early work can

be compared to Yves Klein's monochromes, which were intentionally problematic. The question

"what is art?" is raised more than the question, "is this a good example of art?" This skeptical

undercurrent of Stella's art, in which logic and doubt cohabit, is analogous to those aspects

of Pop Art which are concerned with problems of signification. Lichtenstein's pointillism and

Warhol's repetitive imagery, is more like systemic art in its lack of formal diversity than it is like

other styles of 20th century art. A lack of interest in gestural handling marks both this area of

Pop Art and systemic abstract art. In addition, there are artists who have made a move to

introduce pop references into the bare halls of abstract art theory. One way to do this is by using

color in such a way that it retains a residue of environmental echoes ; commercial and industrial

paint and finishes can be used in this way. For example, Al Brunelle has written of this painting

in the present exhibition: "Jayne has a blue edge on the left, superimposed upon the under-

lying scheme. On this side she does not silhouette as brightly as on the right, nor do the edges

on left 'track' as they do so nicely within the painting. The blue line does not remedy any of

this. It has a function similar to eyeliner" 12. The reference to eyeliner, combined with the

20

"cobra skin" finish, the crystals, and the pink plastic surfaces, raises an association of pop

culture that is hard to shake.

Irving Sandler's term for systemic painting, both abstract and pop, is "Cool-Art" (36),

as characterized by calculation, impersonality, and boredom. "An art as negative as Stella's

cannot but convey utter futility and boredom" ; he considers conceptual art as merely "mecha-

nistic". \S hat Sandler has done is to take the Abstract Classicist label and then attack it like a

Romantic, or at least a supporter of Abstract Expressionist art, should. He is against "one-shot

art" because of his requirement of good artists: "they have to grope". This quotation is from

a catalogue of Concrete Expressionism, his term for a group of painters including Al Held. He

argues that theirs is struggle painting, like expressionism, but that their forms are "disassoci-

ated", his term for non-relational. Thus Sandler locates an energy and power in their work said

to be missing from hollow and easy "Cool-Art "'. The difference between so-called Concrete

Expressionist and Abstract Expressionist paintings, however, is significant; they are flatter and

smoother. Al Held's pictures are thick and encrusted with reworkings, but he ends up with a

relatively clear and hard surface. The shift of sensibility, which this exhibition records, is

evident in his work. Held may regard his paintings as big forms, but when the background is

only a notch at the picture's margin, he is virtually dealing with fields.

The pressing problem of art criticism now is to re-establish abstract art's connections

with other experience without, of course, abandoning the now general sense of art's autonomy.

One way is by the repetition of images, which without preassigned meanings become the record

and monument of the artist. Another way is by the retention of known iconography, in however

abbreviated or elliptical form. Priscilla Colt, referring to Ad Reinhardt's basic cross noted: "In

earlier paintings it assumed the elongated proportions of the crucifix; in the black squares the

pointedness of the reference is diminished, since the arms are equal, but it remains". Miss Colt

also notes the expressive connotations of Reinhardt's "pushing of the visible toward the brink

of the invisible" 13. Noland's circles, whatever he may have intended, never effaced our knowl-

edge, built-in and natural by now, of circular systems of various types. Circles have an iconog-

raphy; images become motives with histories. The presence of covert or spontaneous iconog-

raphic images is basic to abstract art, rather than the purity and pictorial autonomy so often

ascribed to it. The approach of formalist critics splits the work of art into separate elements,

isolating the syntax from all its echoes and consequences. The exercise of formal analysis, at the

expense of other properties of art, might be called formalistic positivism 14. Formal analysis

needs the iconographical and experiential aspects, too, which can no longer be dismissed

as "literary" except on the basis of an archaic estheticism.

Lawrence Alloway

21

\OTE«

1. Meyer Shapiro. "The \ounger American Painters of Today", The Listener, London, no. 1404, January 26,

1956, pp. 146^7.

2. Clement Greenberg. "American-type Painting", Art and Culture, Boston, Beacon Press 1961, pp. 208-29.

3. Deductive structure is the verbal echo and opposite of what William Rubin called "'inductive' or indirect

painting" (3), but the phrase (which meant painting without a brush) never caught on.

4. George Rickey. "The New Tendency (Nouvelle Tendence Recherche Continuelle)", Art Journal, New

York, vol. XXIII, no. 4, Summer 1964, p. 272.

5. The formal difference between wholistic and hierarchic form is often described as "relational" and "non-

relational". Relational refers to paintings like that of the earlier geometric artists which are subdivided and

balanced with a hierarchy of forms, large-medium-small. Non-relational, on the contrary, refers to un-

modulated monochromes, completely symmetrical layouts, or unaccented grids. In fact, of course, relation-

ships (the mode in which one thing stands to another or two or more things to one another) persist, even

when the relations are those of continuity and repetition rather than of contrast and interplay.

(For more information on Hard-Edge see John Coplans : "John McLaughlin, Hard Edge, and American

Painting") Artforum, San Francisco, vol. II, no. 7, January 1964, pp. 28-31.

6. The Los Angeles County Museum, July 1959, Four Abstract Classicists. Text by Jules Langsner.

7. Ad Reinhardt. "Twelve Rules for a New Academy", Art News, New York, vol. 56, no. 3, May 1957,

pp. 37-38, 56.

8. When the present exhibition was proposed originally in June 1964 it was intended to show painting and

sculpture, but Primary Structures covered the ground too closely to repeat it. The reasons for planning to

show flat and 3D work are (1) analogies between work in both media and (2) the number of artists who

combine the technology of one with the formal characteristics of the other. The shaped canvases in this

exhibition are those with lateral variations rather than with volumetric projections; that is to say, closer

to painting.

9. Optical has, at present, two meanings in art criticism. In Greenberg's esthetics color is optical if it creates a

purely visual and non-tactile space. It is one of the properties of "Color" Painting, the term Greenberg

applied to Louis and Noland in 1960 (which has been widely used, including adaptations of it such as

W illiam Seitz's "Color Image"). It is curious, since color is mandatory for all painting, that one way of

using it should be canonized. The other meaning of optical, and its best known usage, is as the optical

in Op Art, meaning art that shifts during the spectator's act of perception.

10. Clement Greenberg. "Modernist Painting", Arts Yearbook 4, New York, 1961, pp. 101-108.

11. James A. McNeill Whistler. Ten O'Clock, Portland, Maine, Thomas Bird Mosher, 1925.

12. Unpublished statement by the artist, 1966.

13. Priscilla Colt. "Notes on Ad Reinhardt", Art International, Lugano, vol. VIII, no. 8, October 20, 1964,

pp. 32-34.

14. Adapted from Leo Spitzer's "imagistic positivism" by which he deplored literary critics' overemphasis on

imagery at the expense of a poem as a whole.

STATEMENTS

JO BAER

23

These paintings form part of a series of twelve. There are

four colors in the .series: blue, green, purple, yellow.

There are also four sizes and shapes : large squares, small

squares, vertical rectangles, horizontal rectangles. Each

particular size and shape needs particular properties of

color: intense, or pale, or grayed, or bright. The possibili.

ties for combination or grouping of the paintings are the

permutations of twelve (831,753,600) or whatever set

factors are chosen. The paintings here are the three large

squares and they use the intense color bands. All the

paintings are color in a luminous mode, but this group

also renders the primary colors of light: a red (magenta),

a green, a blue. They are each constructed equivalent to

one another as a color presence.

Summer, 1966

DEA\ FLElIIXft

I am working in the area of the totally primal and

available.

Geometry, optics, science and psychology are here used

only as tools and, therefore, have only a relative bearing

on the significance of the work.

The dominant subject of the painting is its effect on each

individual observer. In the case of these immediate

paintings I have limited the relationships to only the

most primary and intense.

In an effort to clarify the subject I have used only straight

lines.

Most of these paintings can objectively be defined by

saying that they are composed of one or two points within

the canvas and the connection of these points to the

outer edges.

This approach to the work yields nothing whatsoever and

we must venture further to reach significant under-

standing.

The situation is one of polar contrasts and their inevitable

interchange of space; the aggression or recession of a

color, the ability of a single color to change in terms of

dark and light, the redness and blueness when related to

another color.

I use color because of its relativity to the human eye and

believe in color and not color dogma.

Formally they contain the tensions and lucid changes that

exist between the diagonal and the horizontal and vertical.

We are already aware of the passivity of the horizontal,

the ascension and descension of the vertical, and the

dynamics of the diagonal.

I am using these things as tools to evoke like states in the

receiver.

The effectiveness of the painting can be facilitated by the

ability of the observer to be free of references and

attitudes.

Like music, this work can be best received in silence.

Blue, red, black, white and yellow have natures of their

own which vary according to the receptivity of each ob-

server and must be absorbed according to the individual

rhythm and time-grasp of each person concerned.

These can be a way of understanding yourself in a primal

position.

The painting must transcend its materiality both as a

canvas and in the viewer's eye.

If an open viewer allows the reading to be in his own time

he can begin to receive an experience which separates

from the work he sees and he can participate in the

reversals of space and the apparent contradictions be-

tween stillness and sudden motion, weight and gravita-

tionlessness.

A deeply experienced participation with the work can

yeild a sense of transcension and can create an intense

light which contains no color.

January 1965

The subject of art is ultimately spiritual. That vibrant

aspect of the nature of existence which demands to be

created though it is not called for. Still this new work is

utilitarian in that it serves to extend the consciousness of

space and time, a necessity for the psychic survival of

every new society. Now, when basic forms and primary

colors have the strength and velocity to communicate

a new dimension, it is the spirit of our times an artist

expresses rather than the fact.

1966

24

WILL I\SLL1 I \l»\ \UI KCKATAMA

NOTEBOOK EXCERPTSPhysical Engineering—practical function—bridge or

building

Visual Engineering—only visual function—art

Grid—select—vary

freedom within law-

Form perceived in most basic sense as flat shape

Silhouette

Object motivated by surrounding space

Diagram of visual forces

Form movement parallel to the eye plane

Color movement perpendicular to the eye plane

Resultant conflict—visual experience

transcends physical limitations of the material

Physical structure a support for the visual experience

the reality of the work of art

Flat visual object

The painting is an object. Any attempt to consider

the painting as a field or space in which other objects

appear to exist is avoiding the issue of historical neces-

sity today. The painting is the object itself and exists

in the space of the viewer.

Problem—devise structural form system

Future of art lies in mass production

Objects capable of economic repetition

Simple units—stock material

Grid space—select the necessary

1964

Painting—the diagramed object

Abandon historical rectilinear context of contained

illusion

Extend into actual surrounding space

to motivate and be motivated

Fragment of flat visual material

Problem clarified and reduced

Possibilities diminish

Particular color seems less and less important

Color a material coating

visual extension to base material object

Reduce painting to flat silhouette

Expose to most stringent test

proportion of elements

relation of closed and open spaces

Only basic relationships withstand observation

Emotional and seductive icing of historical cake removed

Painting becomes wall—wall becomes environment

Systematic relationship of measured elements

calculated to project visual force beyond material thing

Grid space—select the necessary

1966

Ideas, thoughts, philosophy, reasons, meanings, even the

humanity of the artist, do not enter into my work at all.

There is only the art itself. That is all.

1964

DAVID III

EXCERPTS FROM STATEMENT3

1 am tempted to distinguish three stages in the recent

history of painting or if you prefer, which I fear is nn

likely, three attitudes toward decoration. Image. Object.

Environment. By image I refer to the framed illustrations

which used to be so prevalent and whose dimensions

seemed more the result of convienience than any art. The

second stage corresponds to those paintings, occasionally

resembling a familiar object, often abstract, often very

large, and usually unframed, whose content, at least in

the most famous examples, is precisely equivalent in

spirit and in fact to its dimensions. One hopes no more

will be said of cubism.

I would like to say of the third, the environmental stage

that these paintings have no beginning and no end, but

despite our wishful thinking paintings don't naturally

exist in time. Perhaps they have no middle. They exhibit

a penchant for presenting materials factually and for

employing a numerical set as something signifying

nothing but itself. The content of these paintings is a

certain quantity, an accumulation, and they are some-

times quite witless. Their distinction, and their vulner-

ability, is that they don't exist except on a wall, at best on

a particular wall, the wall for which they were designed,

often no other wall than the painter's own.

Like most labor-saving devices, the reduction of a pain-

ter's aesthetic choices to what sets and how fine a series is

spiritualizing. Unfortunately an effect of employing labor-

saving devices is that people get out of the habit of

working, in our case of looking, and it shows. On the

other hand, the perfection of technique by which we

reduce labor is not generally intended for any spiritual-

izing end. We don't respect a perfected technique; we

say we're bored. Charles Baudouin says of technique that

when it is any use it advances to close the circle of man's

achievement where it began, at mysticism.

25

Here are some questions for critics to ask themselves.

What is the combination of need and desire in the dis-

tinction of art? Is there any sense in decorating a wall if

the wall is not then more interesting to see? If it is tedious

to describe the details of the construction of a blank wall,

is the wall therefore boring to see? Can there be progress

except toward an ideal, an end-point, and, if there is no

progress, is there value in a thing being new? If a work is

to be judged by arrangement with the intentions of its

author, does the critic require the authority to make

assurances that a work of art is intended? Can an object,

or a fact, exist out of time and still be up-to-date?

1966

and preventing the surface itself from becoming too

illusionary.

Working with both symmetric and assymmetric formed

pieces.

New works have incorporated the curve. The curve

forming the lower edge, is a segment of a circle, rather

than an organic or eliptical curve.

June 1966

i-:imi\ it I i>\

ROBERT MANGOLD

WORK COMMENTS1965-66

Working on architectural, flat, cut-out forms of masonite-

faced plywood.

Began to develop certain potentialities of the spray

technique; atmosphere like quality of sprayed surface,

blending possibilities of color and tone.

Gradations of tone occur at lower edge of piece, and are

kept subtle to allow a primary total form reading, surface

expands, dissolves. Did not use ideas that were too

pictorial or where the gradation was too strong.

Pieces follow in series of similar formal structures and

similar color ranges. Oil paint thinned with turpentine is

the medium used, because of more flexible color mixing

and the matte open finish.

Primarily concerned with evasive color, difficult to pin

down or define.

Color sequence is either (going from top to bottom),

neutral moving into color, color moving into neutral, or

from lighter to darker value of the same color. Where it

is a neutral to color or color to neutral sequence, the

value of the two tones is similar.

Have used the 4 foot width of sheets of building material

as a working element, a piece whose total size is 96 x 96

inches, (2-4 foot x 8 foot sheets), would have a vertical

division occuring in the middle, the division becoming a

black line at this point. Chose not to allow the panel

break to occur, except at the measured center, keeping it

from becoming a proportional-compositional division.

Visually the central black line gives the eye a neutral

point to move through the surface, bringing the periphery

line inside, preventing a too simple, total contour reading,

I scale my painting to the maximum visual limit. If the

painting extended outward more than twenty feet I

would no longer see that I mean.

Right and left symmetry are more opposite than alike.

Repetition is different because it occurs "elsewhere".

The subtle paradox is maddening, curious and amusing.

By getting rid of extraneous, generalized notions I arrive

at the leanest possible shape—a focus that allows a

"large" picture to be seen at once.

Simplification is not synonymous with boredom but on

the contrary demands visual acuity.

Summer 1966

LARR1 KOX

SCISSORS JACK SERIES

Once the proportions and outside scale of the paintings

are determined, the interior structure is established.

Inverted V's or triangles repeat four times to become the

structure upon which the final dimensions depend. Each

V contains four units of space, therefore 16 units of space

within the total painting.

Various systems of color are used to correspond to the

compartments of space. General arrangements of color

are used. (Four different colors in alternating intervals,

continuous color moving across the horizontal in fluctu-

ating zones, sixteen color combinations separating each

unit vertically and horizontally.)

The SCISSOR'S JACK SERIES was executed in 1965.

The particular choice of color was arbitrary in that colors

were chosen at random in the execution of the paintings.

This specific structure became dominant as a foundation

for my work at the time.

June 16, 1966

Measurements in inches: Height precedes width; depth, where given, is the last figure.

27

Paul Feeley. Asellus. 1964. Acrylic on canvas, four canvases each 47* x 471". Lent by Betty Parsons Gallery, New York.

28

Agnes Martin. The City. 1966. Acrylic on canvas, 71 i x 72". Lent by Robert Elkon Gallery. New York.

29

Will Insley. Wall at Dawn, 1963. Acrylic on masonite, 1031 x 103 i". Collection Steve Schapiro, Brooklyn Heights, New York.

fti

o

a-

o

"So

fts

34

Ralph Humphrey. Three Lines, I. 1966. Acrylic on canvas, 69J x 70". Lent by Bykert Gallery, New York.

35

Tadaaki Kuwayama. Untitled. 1965. Acrylic on canvas with chrome stripping, two canvases each 961 x 42". Lent by the artist.

Howard Mehring. In the Key of Blue II. 1965. Acrylic on canvas, 85i x 70". Lent by A. M. Sachs Gallery, New \ot\s..

^

o

<

39

o

<

41

O

o

o

cd

H-l

<^>

Pi

44

Al Brunelle. Juync. 1965. Metalized cellulose acetate butyrate on wood with acrylic and crystals, six panels each 21 x 21 x 3"

Lent bv the artist.

45

O

•_

o

<

N

i

. , ..:.. :.,.-.

Frank Stella. TTolfeboro, 4. 1966. Epoxy and fluorescent alkalide on canvas, 160+ x 100 x 4". Lent by Leo Castelli Gallery, New Yorl

Larry Poons. Mary Queen of Scots. Acrylic on canvas, 135 x 90". Collection Mr. and Mrs. Robert Scull, New York.

Robert Ryman. Allied. 1966. Oil on canvas, 751 x 753". Lent by the artist.

51

Al Held. The Big End. 1966. Acrylic on canvas, 1071 x 108i". Lent by Andre Emmerich Gallery, New York

'-•! ;' ">** '''--:::.:. J'"IM

Leon Smith. Correspondence Orange-Blue. 1965. Oil on canvas, 90 x 68". Lent by Galerie Chalette, New York.

53

T

Jack Youngerman. Blue White Red. 1965. Polymer emulsion on canvas, 107 i x 87 i". Lent by Betty Parsons Gallery, New York.

54

Nicholas Krushenick. Tel Aviv Hippy. 1966. Acrylic on canvas, 90 x 75+". Lent by Pace Gallery, New York.

56

II I II 1,1 III. It A I'll V

Bibliographies: references are to one-man exhibitions,

unless otherwise stated. Numbered exhibition entries

mean that a catalogue was published: un-numbered

entries mean that only an announcement was printed.

Existing bibliographies of artists have not been duplicated.

Key to biographies : date of birth, present residence and

year of arrival, and New York gallery.

4.1 \ I IE VI

1. goossen, e. c. "The Big Canvas", Art International, 16.

Zurich, vol. II, no. 8, 1958, pp. 45-47.

2. tillim, Sidney. "What Happened to Geometry: AnInquiry into Geometrical Painting in America", Arts,

New York, vol. 33, no. 9, June 1959, pp. 38-44.

3. Rubin, william. "Younger American Painters'", Art In- 17.

ternational, Zurich, vol. IV, no. 1, January 1960, pp. 24-

31. Includes Kelly, Noland, Stella, Youngerman.4. David Herbert Gallery, New York, February 8-27, 1960, 18.

Modern Classicism. Text by Barbara Butler. Includes

Kelly, Smith.

5. alloway, Lawrence. "On the Edge", Architectural 19.

Design, London, vol. XXX, no. 4, April 1960, pp. 164-165.

6. butler, Barbara. "Contemporary Classicism", Art In-

ternational, Zurich, vol. IV, no. 5, May 25, 1960, pp. 20a

39-40.

American Federation of Arts, New York, October 1960-

October 1961, Purist Painting, circulating exhibition. 20bChecklist, includes Kelly, Martin, Smith.

7. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, 21.

October-December 1961, American Abstract Expres-

sionists and Imagists. Text by H. H. Arnason. Includes

Held, Humphrey, Kelly, Noland, Smith, Stella, Younger-

man. Bibliography.

8. Reviews: kroll, jack. "American Painting and the 22.

convertible Spiral", Art News, New York, vol.

60, no. 7, November 1961, pp. 34-37, 66-69.

9. alloway, Lawrence. "Easel Painting at the 23aGuggenheim", Art International, Zurich, vol.

V, no. 10, Christmas 1961, pp. 27-34.

10. Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, March 20-

May 13, 1962, Geometric Abstraction in America. Text by 23bJohn Gordon. Includes Held, Kelly, Martin, Noland,

Smith, Stella. 24.

11. Reviews: kozloff, max. "Geometric Abstraction in

America", Art International, Zurich, vol. VI,

nos. 5-6, Summer 1962, pp. 98-103.

12. michelson, annette. "L'Abstraction geome- 25.

trique en Amerique", AA Siecle, Paris, vol. 24,

no. 20, December 1962, supplement.

13. ahlander, Leslie judd. "The Emerging Art of Washing- 26.

ton", Art International, Zurich, vol. VI, no. 9, November25, 1962, pp. 30-33. Includes Downing, Mehring, Noland.

14. The Jewish Museum, New York, May 19-September 15, 27.

1963, Toward a New Abstraction. Introduction by BenHeller. Includes text on Al Held by Irving Sandler; on

Ellsworth Kelly by Henry Geldzahler; on Kenneth Noland 28.

by Alan R. Solomon; on Frank Stella by Michael Fried.

15. Washington Gallery of Modern Art, Washington D.C.,

June 6-July 7, 1963, Formalists. Introduction by AdelynD. Breeskin. Includes Kelly, Kuwayama, Martin, Poons,

Stella, Youngerman.

The Poses Institute of Fine Arts, Brandeis University,

Waltham, Massachusetts, December 1, 1963-December 6,

1964, New Directions in American Painting, circulating

exhibition. Text by Sam Hunter. Includes Held, Noland,

Kelly, Smith, Stella, Youngerman.The Jewish Museum, New York, December 12, 1963-

February 5, 1964, Black and JVhite. Text by Ben Heller.

Includes Kelly, Stella, Youngerman.Reviews: kozloff, max. "The Many Colorations of

Black and White", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. II, no. 8, February 1964, pp. 22-25.

rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VIII, no. 1, February

15, 1964, pp. 40-41.

Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford, Connecticut, January 9-

February 9, 1964, Black, White and Gray. Includes

Kelly, Martin, Stella.

Review: judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 6,

March 1964, p. 38.

The University of Michigan Museum of Art, Ann Arbor,

January 15-February 9, 1964, The New Formalists:

Contemporary American Paintingfor Purchase Consider-

ation. Foreword by Robert Inglehart. Includes Noland,

Smith.

tillim, Sidney. "The New Avant-Garde", Arts, NewYork, vol. 38, no. 5, February 1964, pp. 18-21. Includes

Stella.

The Los Angeles County Museum, Los Angeles, April 23-

June 7, 1964, Post Painterly Abstraction. Text by Cle-

ment Greenberg. Includes Downing, Feeley, Held, Kelly,

Krushenick, Mehring, Noland, Stella.

Reprinted in Art International, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos.

5-6, Summer 1964, pp. 63-65.

Review: coplans, john. "Post Painterly Abstraction:

the Long-Awaited Greenberg Exhibition Fails

to Make its Point", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. II, no. 12, Summer 1964, pp. 4-9.

rose, Barbara. "The Primacy of Color", Art Internatio-

nal, Lugano, vol. VIII, no. 4, May 1964, pp. 22-26.

Includes Downing, Poons, Williams.

"New Talent USA: Newly Nominated", Art in America,

New York, vol. 52, no. 4, August 1964, pp. 81-111.

Includes Krushenick, Kuwayama, Poons."56 Painters and Sculptors", Art in America, New York,

vol. 52, no. 4, August 1964, pp. 22-79. Includes Held,

Kelly, I oungerman.The Hudson River Museum. Yonkers, New York,

October 11-25, 1964, 8 Young Artists. Text by E. C.

Goossen. Includes Barry, Huot.

57

29. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New \ork, De- 45.

cember 1964, The Shaped Canvas. Text by LawrenceAlioway. Includes Feeley, Stella, Williams.

30. Reviews: judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 5,

February 1965, p. 56. 46.

31. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 2, March1965, p. 46. 47.

32. tillim, Sidney. "Optical Art: Pending or Ending?",

Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 4, January 1965, pp. 16-23. 48.

33. Sandler, irving. "The New Cool-Art", Art in America,

New York, vol. 53, no. 1, February 1965, pp. 96-101.

34. The Museum of Modern Art, New York, February 23- 49.

April 25, 1965, The Responsive Eye. Text by William C.

Seitz. Includes Downing, Feeley, Kelly, Martin, Noland,

Poons, Smith, Stella. 50.

35. Review: rickey, george. "Scandale de Succes", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 4, May,

1965, pp. 16-23.

36. Loeb Student Center, New York University, New York, 51.

April 6-29, 1965, Concrete Expressionism. Text by Irving

Sandler.

37. Reprinted as "Expressionism with Corners", Art News, 52.

New York, vol. 64, no. 2, April 1965, pp. 38^0, 65-66.

Includes Held.

38. Reviews: lippard, lucy r. "New York Letter", Art 53.

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 5, July

1965, pp. 51-52.

39. ashton, dore. Studio International, London,vol. 170, no. 868, August 1965, pp. 87-89. 54.

40. Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge,Massachusetts, April 21-May 30, 1965, Three American 55.

Painters: Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski, Frank Stella.

Text by Michael Fried. Two parts of the introduction

appeared earlier in slightly different form: Section I in

41. American Scholar, vol. 33, no. 4, Autumn 1964, pp. 56.

642-649, as "Modernist Painting and Formal Criticism"

;

Section III as the introduction to Kenneth Noland's retro-

spective exhibition at The Jewish Museum, New York, 57.

February 4-March 7, 1965.

42. lippard, lucy R. "The Third Stream", Art Voices, NewYork, vol. 4, no. 2, Spring 1965, pp. 44-49. Includes 58.

Mangold, Ruda, Stella, Williams.

43. "Neue Abstraktion", Das Kunstwerk, Baden-Baden, vol.

XVIII, nos. 10-12, April-June 1965, Special number. 59.

Introduction by Klaus Jurgen-Fischer, pp. 3-6. Includes

Held, Kelly, Krushenick, Kuwayama, Noland, Stella.

44. VIII Bienal of the Museum of Modern Art, Sao Paulo, 60.

Brazil, Summer 1965. Exhibition of the United States of

America. Text by Walter Hopps. Includes Poons, Stella.

Washington Gallery of Modern Art, Washington, D.C.,

June 25-September 5, 1965, The Washington Color

Painters. Text by Gerald Nordland. Includes Downing,Mehring, Noland. Bibliography.

Review: stevens, Elisabeth. "The Washington Color

Painters", Arts, New York, vol. 40, no. 1,

November 1965, pp. 30-33.

Kunsthalle, Basel, June 26-September 5, 1965, Signale.

Text by A. Riidlinger. Includes Held, Kelly, Noland.

Review: "Basel: Signale; Ausstellung in der Kunst-

halle", Werk, Winterthur, Switzerland, vol. 52,

no. 8, August 1965, supplement, pp. 179-180.

robins, corinne. "Six Artists and the New ExtendedVision", Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 10, September-October 1965, pp. 19-24. Includes Held.

rose, Barbara. "The Second Generation: Academy andBreakthrough", Artforum, San Francisco, vol. IV, no. 1,

September 1965, pp. 53-63. Includes Held, Kelly,

Noland, Youngerman.rose, Barbara. "ABC Art", Art in America, New York,

vol. 53, no. 5, October 1965, pp. 56-69. Statements byStella, Zox.

San Francisco Museum of Art, San Francisco, October 15-

November 21, 1965, Colorists 1950-1960. Includes

Feeley, Noland, Poons, Smith, Stella, Williams.

plessix, francine du. "Painters and Poets", Art in

America, New York, vol. 53, no. 5, October-November

1965, pp. 24-56. Includes drawings by Feeley, Younger-

man.bourdon, david. "Park Place: New Ideas", The Village

Voice, New York, November 25, 1965, pp. 11 + .

bourdon, david. "E=Mc2 a go-go; Ten Painters and

Sculptors Form a Lively, Objective Collective in NewYork", Art News, New York, vol. 64, no. 9, January 1966,

pp. 22-25, 57-59. Park Place artists.

welsh, Robert. "The Growing Influence of Piet Mon-drian", Canadian Art, 100, Toronto, vol. 23, no. 1,

January 1966, pp. 44-49.

lippard, lucy r. "New York Letter", Art International,

Lugano, vol. X, no. 1, January 20, 1966, p. 91. Includes

Fleming, Novros, Ruda.

"A New Abstraction: A Discussion Conducted by Bruce

Glaser", Art International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 2,

February 20, 1966, pp. 41-45. Includes Held.

robins, corinne. "Four Directions at Park Place", Arts,

New York, vol. 40, no. 8, June 1966, pp. 20-24. Includes

Ruda, Novros.

smithson, robert. "Entropy and the New Monuments",

Artforum, Los Angeles, vol. IV, no. 10, June 1966,

pp. 26-31.

58

JO BAER1929. Seattle, WashingtonNew York, 1960

Fischbach Gallery, New \ ork, February 1966.

61. Reviens: ashbery. john. Art News. New York, vol. 64,

no. 10, February, 1966, p. 13.

62. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 4, April 20.

1966, p. 73.

63. goldin. amy. Arts. New York. vol. 40, no. 6.

April 1966. p. 69.

ROBERT BARRY1936. New YorkResident New \ork

Westerly Gallery, New York, October 6-24, 1964.

64. Review: stevens, Elisabeth. Art News, New York,

vol. 63, no. 7, November 1964. p. 53.

AL BRUNELLE1934, Minneapolis. Minnesota

New York. 1962

THOMAS DOWNING1928, Ivor, \ irginia

Resident ^ ashington, D.C.

Allan Stone Gallery, New York, June 1962.

65. Review: sharpless, ti-grace a. Art News, New York,

vol. 61, no. 5, September 1962. p. 16.

Stable Gallery, New York, October 1-19, 1963.

66. Reviews: swenson, g. r. Art News, New York. vol. 62.

no. 6. October 1963, p. 12.

67. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 2,

November 1963, p. 35.

68. rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VII. no. 9. December5, 1963, p. 65.

Stable Gallery, New York, January 5-23, 1965.

69. Reviews: edgar, natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 10, February 1965, p. 14.

70. grossberg, Jacob. Arts, New York, vol. 39,

no. 5, February 1965. p. 65.

71. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 2, March1965, p. 51.

PAUL FEELEY1913, Des Moines, IowaLived in Bennington. Vermont after 1946Died 1966, New YorkBettv Parsons Gallerv. New York

Tibor De Nagy Gallery, New \ork, February- 1958.

72. Reviews: Campbell, Lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 57, no. 1, March 1958. p. 13.

73. dash. R. warren. Arts, New York. vol. 32.

no. 6. March 1958, p. 60.

74. goossen, e. c. "The End of Winter in NewIt ork", Art International. Zurich, vol. 2.

nos. 2-3, 1958, pp. 37-38.

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, May 1960.

75. Reviews: campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 59. no. 3, May 1960, p. 15.

'

76. judd, donald. Arts, New York. vol. 34. no. 8,

May 1960, p. 60.

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, May 14-June 2, 1962.

77. Reviews: campbell, Lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 61, no. 4, Summer 1962, p. 17.

78. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 36, no. 10,

September 1962, p. 47.

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, May 13-31, 1963.

79. Reviews: sandler. irvixg h. Art News, New York, vol.

62. no. 3. May 1963, p. 58.

80. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 10,

September 1963, p. 59.

81. alloway, Lawrence. "Paul Feeley", Living Arts 3, Lon-

don, 1964, pp. 26^47. Includes interview- with the artist.

Kasmin Limited, London, Fall 1964.

82. Review: lynton, norbert. "London Letter", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. 8, no. 10, December1964, pp. 44-45.

Bettv Parsons Gallerv. New \ ork. October 27-November21, 1964.

83. Reviews: edgar, natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 8, December 1964, p. 14.

84. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 3,

December 1964, p. 69.

85. rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational. Luaano. vol. 8. no. 10. December1964, p. 50.

86. goossen, e. c. "Paul Feeley", Art International, Lugano,

vol. 8, no. 10, December 1964, pp. 31-33.

Betty Parsons Gallery. New \ork, December 7-31, 1965.

87. Reviews: Art News. New York, vol. 64. no. 8. December1965. p. 14.

88. glueck, grace. Art in America, New York,

vol. 53, no. 6, December 1965, p. 124.

89. baro, gene. "Paul Feeley: The Art of the Definite", Arts,

New7 York, vol. 40, no. 4, February 1966, pp. 19-25.

DEAN FLEMING1933. Santa Monica. California

New York, 1961

Park Place Gallery, New \ ork

Park Place Gallery, New York, December 19, 1965-

January 20, 1966. Dean Fleming and Anthony Magar.90. Revieivs: bourdon, david. "Parallelogram Backflip",

The Village Voice, New \ork, December 23,

1965, p. 12.

91. berrigan, ted. Art News, New York, vol. 64.

no. 10, February 1966, p. 15.

92. adrian. dennis, "New York", Artforum, Los

Angeles, vol. IV, no. 7, March 1966, p. 52.

59

93. berkson, william. Arts, New York, vol. 40,

no. 5, March 1966, p. 60.

94. FLEMING, DEAN, PETER FORAKIS, PHYLLIS YAMPOLSKY.Grope, New York, January 1964, vol. 1, no. 1, Ergo-Suit

Productions, Tibor de Nagy Editions.

95. "New Talent USA", Art in America, New York, vol. 54,

no. 4, July-August, 1966, p. 45 . Selected by Larry

Aldrich. Statement by the artist.

96. FLEMING, DEAN, PHYLLIS yampolsky. The Blown Mind,New York, New York Express, 1966.

111. Galerie Renee Ziegler, Zurich, October 2-30, 1964. Textby Harald Szeemann.

112. Review: H.C. Werk, Winterthur, Switzerland, vol. 51,

no. 12, supplement, p. 292, December 1964.

113. baigell, matthew. "American Abstract Expressionismand Hard Edge: Some Comparisons", Studio Inter-

national, London, vol. 171, no. 873, January 1966, pp.10-15.

PETER GOURFAIN1934, Chicago, Illinois

New York, 1961

Bridge Gallery, New York, March 9-27, 1965. Peter

Gourfain and David Lee.

97. Reviews: waldman, diane. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 1, March 1965, p. 15.

98. judd, donald. "New York Notes", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 4, May 1965,

p. 65.

99. hoene, anne. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 9,

May-June, 1965, p. 64.

AL HELD1928, New YorkResident New YorkAndre Emmerich Gallery, New York

Poindexter Gallery, New York, January 1959.

100. Reviews: sandler, irving h. Art News, New York, vol.

57, no. 9, January 1959, p. 17.

101. b.d.h. Arts, New York, vol. 33, no. 5, February

1959, p. 64.

Poindexter Gallery, New York, January 18-February 6,

1960.

102. Reviews: crehan, Hubert. Art News, New York, vol.

58, no. 9, January 1960, p. 15.

103. dennison, george. Arts, New York, vol. 34,

no. 4, January 1960, p. 58.

Poindexter Gallery, New York, May 1-20, 1961.

104. Review: sandler, irving h. Art News, New York, vol.

60, no. 3, May 1961, p. 15.

105. "New Talent USA", Art in America, New York, vol. 50,

no. 1, 1962, p. 26. Chosen by Richard Brown Baker andDorothy Gees Seckler.

Poindexter Gallery, New York, November 13-December1, 1962.

106. Reviews: sandler, irving h. Art News, New York, vol.

61, no. 8, December 1962, p. 14.

107. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 4,

January 1963, p. 47.

108. sandler, irving. "New York Letter", Quad-rum, Brussels, no. 14, 1963, pp. 121-122.

109. sandler, irving. "Al Held paints a picture", Art News,New York, vol. 63, no. 3, May 1964, pp. 42-15, 51.

110. ashton, dore. "Al Held, New Spatial Experiences",

Studio International, London, vol. 168, no. 859, Novem-ber 1964, pp. 210-213.

RALPH HUMPHREY1932, Youngstown, OhioNew York, 1956

Bykert Gallery, New York

Tibor de Nagy Gallery, New York, February 3-21, 1959.

114. Review: Campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 57, no. 10, February 1959, p. 17.

Tibor de Nagy Gallery, New York, February 2-21, 1960.

115. Reviews: Campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 58, no. 10, February 1960, p. 14.

116. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 34, no. 6,

March 1960, p. 54.

Mayer Gallery, New York, May 1961.

117. Review: sandler, irving. Art News, New York, vol. 60,

no. 3, May 1961, p. 15.

Green Gallery, New York, May 5-29, 1965.

118. Reviews: levine, neil a. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 4, Summer 1965, p. 16.

119. goldin, amy. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 10,

September-October 1965, p. 66.

ROBERT HUOT1935, Staten Island

Resident New YorkStephen Radich Gallery, New York

Stephen Radich Gallery, New York, May 4-30, 1964.

120. Reviews: edgar, natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 4, Summer 1964, p. 59.

121. fried, michael. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6,

Summer 1964, p. 82.

122. Vassar College Art Gallery, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie,

New York, May 4-31, 1964. New Directions 1964. Text

by Linda Nochlin.

Stephen Radich Gallery, New York, March 9-April 3.

1965.

123. Reviews: berkson, william. Arts, New York, vol 39,

no. 9, May 1965, p. 68.

124. gablik, suzi. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 3, May 1965, p. 46.

125. judd, donald. "New York Notes", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 4, May 1965,

p. 65.

126. greene, sue. Art Voices, New York, vol. 4,

no. 2, Spring 1965, p. 111.

Stephen Radich Gallery, New York, March 15-April 2,

1966.

127. Review: burton, scott. Art News, New York, vol. 65,

no. 2, April 1966, p. 16.

60

WILL INSLEY1929. Indianapolis. Indiana

New York, 1957

Stable Gallery, New "York-

Stable Gallery, New York. .May 11-29, 1965

128. Reviews: edgar, Natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 3. May 1965, p. 18.

129. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 6, Sep-

tember 20, 1965, p. 59.

130. hoene, anne. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 10.

September-October 1965, p. 68.

Stable Gallery, New York. April 12-30, 1966.

131. Review: BURTON, SCOTT. Art News, New York, vol. 65,

no. 2. April 1966, p. 16.

ELLSWORTH KELLY1923, Newburgb, New YorkNew York, 1954

Sidney Janis Gallery, New York

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, May 21-June 9. 1956.

132. Reviews: butler, Barbara. Arts, New York, vol. 30,

no. 9, June 1956, p. 52.

133. tyler. parker. Art News, New York, vol. 55.

no. 4, June 1956, p. 51.

134. W hitney Museum of American Art, New York, February

27-April 4, 1957, Young America 1957. Edited by

John I. H. Baur and Rosalind Irvine.

Bettv Parsons Gallerv, New \ork. September 23-October12. 1957.

135. Reviews: S.B. Arts, New York, vol. 32, no. 1. October

1957, p. 56.

136. tyler, parker. Art News, New York, vol. 56,

no. 6, October 1957, p. 17.

137. Galerie Maeght, Paris, October 24, 1958. Article byE. C. Goossen, "Ellsworth Kelly", Derriere le Miroir,

Paris, A. Maeght, no. 110, 1958.

'

Bettv Parsons Gallerv. New York. October 19-November7, 1959.

138. Revieivs: Campbell, Lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 58, no. 6. October 1959, p. 13.

139. tillim, Sidney. Arts, New York, vol. 34, no. 1,

October 1959, pp. 48-50.

140. ashton, dore. Arts and Architecture, Los

Angeles, vol. 76, no. 12, December 1959. p. 7.

141. tillim, Sidney. "Profiles: Ellsworth Kellv", Arts Year-

book 3, New York, 1959, pp. 148-151.

142. The Museum of Modern Art, New York, December 16,

1959-February 14, 1960, Sixteen Americans. Introduction

by Dorothy C. Miller. Statement by the artist.

143. seuphor, michel. "Sens et Permanence de la Peinture

Construite", Quadrum, Brussels, no. 8, 1960. p. 52.

144. Arthur Tooth and Sons, Ltd., London, January 24-

February 18, 1961, 6 American Abstract Painters. Text

by Lawrence Alloway. Includes Kelly, Martin, Smith.

Bettv Parsons Gallerv, New ^1 ork, October 16-November4, 1961.

145. Reviews: sandler, irving h. Art News, New York, vol.

60, no. 8, November 1961, p. 13.

146. tillim, Sidney. Arts, New York, vol. 36, no. 3,

December 1961, p. 48.

147. seckler, dorothy gees. "American Art International:

Gallery Notes", Art in America, New York, vol. 49, no. 2.

1961, pp. 88-89.

148. ashton, dore. "Art USA 1962". Studio, London, vol.

163, no. 827, March 1962, p. 89.

149. alloway, Lawrence. "Heraldry and Sculpture", ArtInternational, Zurich, vol. YI, no. 3. April 1962. pp.52-53.

150. Arthur Tooth and Sons, Ltd., London, May 29-June 23,

1962. Text by Lawrence Alloway. Original layout by Kelly.

151. RUBIN, WILLIAM. "Ellsworth Kelly: the Big Form", ArtNews, New York, vol. 62, no. 7, November 1963. pp.32-35.

Bettv Parsons Gallerv, New York, October 29-November23, 1963.

153. Review: fried, michael. "New York Letter", ArtInternational, Lugano, vol. VII, no. 10,

January 16, 1964, p. 54.

154. W ashington Gallery of Modern Art, Washington, D.C.,

December 11, 1963-January 26, 1964, Paintings, Sculp-

ture and Drawings. Includes an "Interriew with Ellsworth

Kelly" by Henry Geldzahler, November 1963.

155. Reprinted in Art International, Lugano, vol. VIII, no. 1,

February 15. 1964, pp. 47-48.

156. kramer, hilton. '"Realists" and Others", Arts, New-

York, vol. 38, no. 4, January 1964, p. 22.

157. johnson, philip. "Young Artists at the Fair", Art in

America, New York, vol. 52, no. 4, August 1964, p. 121.

Sidney Janis Gallery, New York, April 6-May 1, 1965.

158. Revieivs: barnitz. Jacqueline. Arts, New York, vol. 39.

nos. 8-9, May 1965, p. 58.

159. levin, kim. Art News, New York, vol. 64, no. 3.

May 1965, p. 10.

160. greene, sue. Art Voices, New York, vol. 4,

no. 2, Spring 1965, p. 108.

161. ashton, dore. Studio International, London,vol. 170, no. 867, July 1965, pp. 40-42.

162. michelson, annette. "Paris Letter", Art International,

Lugano, vol. IX, no. 2, March 1965, p. 39.

Ferus Gallery, Los Angeles, March 15, 1966.

163. Review: von meier, kurt. "Los Angeles Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 5, May 1966.

pp. 58-59.

164. "Four Drawings: Ellsworth Kelly", Artforum, Los

Angeles, vol. IV, no. 6, February 1966, pp. 40-41.

NICHOLAS KRUSHENICK1929, New YorkResident New YorkPace Gallery, New \ ork

Camino Gallery, New York, May 1956. John and Nicholas

Krushenick.

165. Review: tyler, parker. "Brothers Krushenick at

Camino", Art News, New York, vol. 55, no. 3,

May 1956, p. 57.

Camino Gallerv, New York. January 25-Februarv 14,

1957.

166. Reviews: tyler, parker. Art News, New York. vol. 55,

no. 10, February 1957, p. 51.

167. young, vernon. Arts, New York, vol. 31. no. 5.

February 1957, p. 65.

Brata Gallery, New York, November 1958.

168. Revieiv: burckhardt, edith. Art News, New lork.

vol. 57, no. 7, November 1958. p. 17.

Brata Gallery. Yew York, October 7-27, 1960.

169. Reviews: beck, james h. Art Neivs, New York, vol. 59,

61

no. 6, October 1960, p. 15.

170. raynor, vivien, Arts, New York, vol. 35,

no. 1, October 1960, p. 66.

Graham Gallery, New York, September 18-October 6,

1962.

171. Reviews: edgar, Natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 61,

no. 5, September 1962, p. 12.

172. tillim, Sidney. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 1,

October 1962, p. 53.

173. ashton, dore. Studio, London, vol. 164, no.

836, December 1962, p. 248.

Graham Gallery, New York, March 31-April 25, 1964.

174. Reviews: benedikt, michael. Art News, New York, vol.

63, no. 2, April 1964, p. 13.

175. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 9,

May 1964, p. 33.

176. rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6, Summer1964, p. 78.

177. Fischbach Gallery, New York, April 6-24, 1965. Text byRobert Rosenblum.

178. Reviews: Campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 64, no. 2, April 1965, p. 17.

179. raynor, vivien. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 9,

May 1965, p. 65.

180. greene, sue. Art Voices, New York, vol. 4,

no. 2, Spring 1965, p. 111.

181. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter": Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 6, Sep-

tember 20, 1965, p. 58.

TADAAKI KUWAYAMA1932, Nagoya, JapanNew York, 1958

Green Gallery, New York, January 10-February 4, 1961.

182. Reviews: campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 59, no. 9, January 1961, p. 18.

183. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 34, no. 4,

January 1961, p. 55.

Green Gallery, New York, February 20-March 10, 1962.

184. Reviews: swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 60,

no. 10, February 1962, p. 53.

185. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 36, no. 7,

April 1962, p. 54.

Kornblee Gallery, New York, April 14-May 2, 1964.

186. Reviews: castile, rand. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 2, April 1964, p. 13.

187. barnitz, Jacqueline. Art Voices, New York,

vol. 3, no. 4, April-May 1964, p. 30.

188. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 10,

Summer 1964, p. 68.

Southampton East Gallery, New York, June 1964.

Tadaaki Kuwayama, Lil Picard, Rakuka Naito.

189. Reviews: brown, Gordon. Art Voices, New York, vol. 3,

no. 5, June 1964, p. 12.

190. swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 4, Summer 1964, p. 17.

John Daniels Gallery, New York, April 6-May 1, 1965.

191. Reviews: levine, neil a. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 3, May 1965, p. 15.

192. grossberg, jacob. Arts, New York, vol. 39,

no. 10, September-October 1965, p. 74.

DAVID LEE1937, Charlottesville, Virginia

New York, 1960

Bridge Gallery, New York, February 11-29, 1964.

193. Reviews: campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 63, no. 1, March 1964, p. 14.

194. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 7,

April 1964, p. 34.

Bridge Gallery, New York, March 9-27, 1965. David Leeand Peter Gourfain.

195. Reviews: waldman, diane. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 1, March 1965, p. 15.

196. judd, donald. "New York Notes", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 4, May 1965, p.

65.

197. hoene, anne. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 9,

May-June 1965, p. 64.

ROBERT MANGOLD1937, North Tonawanda, New YorkNew York, 1962

Fischbach Gallery, New York

Thibaut Gallery, New York, January 4-25, 1964.

198. Reviews: campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 62, no. 9, January 1964, p. 19.

199. Harrison, jane. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 6,

March 1964, p. 67.

200. lippard, lucy r. "New York", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. II, no. 9, March 1964, p. 19.

201. Fischbach Gallery, New York, October 12-30, 1965.

Robert Mangold: Walls and Areas, text by Lucy R.

Lippard.

202. Reviews: Art News, New York, vol. 64, no. 5, October

1965, p. 10.

203. benedikt, michael. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, nos. 9-10,

December 20, 1965, p. 41.

204. berkson, william. Arts, New York, vol. 40,

no. 2, December 1965, p. 65.

AGNES MARTIN1921, Maklin, CanadaResident New YorkRobert Elkon Gallery, New York

Section 11, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, December2-20, 1958.

205. Reviews: burckhardt, edith. Art News, New York,

vol. 57, no. 8, December 1958, p. 17.

206. ventura, anita. Arts, New York, vol. 33, no. 4,

January 1959, p. 59.

Section 11, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, December29-January 16, 1960.

207. Reviews: b.b. Arts, New York, vol. 34, no. 4, January

1960, p. 50.

208. campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 58, no. 9, January 1960, p. 16.

See bibliography no. 144.

62

Bettv Parsons Gallery, New York, September 25-October

14, 1961.

209. Review: edgar, natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 60, 226.

no. 6, October 1961, p. 11.

Robert Elkon Gallery. New York, November 27-Decem- 227.

ber 15, 1962.

210. Reviews: beck, james h. Art News, New York, vol. 61, 228.

no. 9, January 1963, p. 13.

211. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 5,

January 1963, p. 48. 229.

Robert Elkon Gallery, New York, November 12-30, 1963.

212. Reviews: lonngren, lillian. Art News, New York, 230.

vol. 62, no. 8, December 1963, p. 52.

213. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 4, 231.

January 1964, p. 33.

214. greene, sue. Art Voices, New York, vol. 4, 232.

no. 2, Spring 1965, p. 110.

Robert Elkon Gallery, New York, April 10-30, 1965.

215. Reviews: Johnston, jill. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 2, April 1965, p. 10.

216. berkson, william, Arts, New York, vol. 39, 233.

no. 9, May 1965, p. 66.

Nicholas Wilder Gallery, Los Angeles, December 14, 234.

1965-January 8, 1966.

217. Review: snyder, susan r. "Los Angeles", Artforum, 235.

Los Angeles, vol. IV, no. 6, February 1966,

p. 15.

236.

HOWARD MEHRING1931, Washington D.C.

Resident Washington, D.C.

A. M. Sachs Gallery, New York

11-February 15, 1963, Three New American Painters:

Louis, Noland, Olitski. Text by Clement Greenberg.Reprinted as "Three American Painters", Canadian Art,

Ottawa, vol. XX, no. 3, May-June 1963, pp. 172-175.

rose, Barbara. "Kenneth Noland", Art International,

Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6, Summer 1964, pp. 58-61.

XXXII International Biennial Exhibition ofArt, UnitedStates Pavilion, Venice, June 20-October 18, 1964.

Text by Alan R. Solomon, pp. 275-276.

The Jewish Museum, New York, February 4-March 7,

1965, Kenneth Noland. Text by Michael Fried.

Reviews: Campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,vol. 64, no. 1, March 1965, p. 12.

judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 6,

March 1965, p. 54.

judd, donald. "New York Letter", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 3, April 1965,

p. 74.

Andre Emmerich Gallery, New York, November 10-28,

1964.

Reviews: kozloff, max. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 4,

January 1965, p. 48.

ashton, dore. Studio International, London,vol. 169, no. 862, February 1965, p. 92.

lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 1, February

1965, pp. 34-35.

Andre Emmerich Gallery, New York, February 22-

March 13, 1966.

Revieu): lippard, lucy r. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 4, April 20,

1966, p. 74.

218. ahlander, Leslie judd. "An Artist Speaks: HowardMehring", Washington Post, Washington, September 2,

1962, p. 67.

A. M. Sachs Gallery, New York, April 27-May 15, 1965.

219. Reviews: berrigan, ted. Art News, New York, vol. 64,

no. 3, May 1965, p. 16.

220. hoene, anne. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 10,

September-October 1965, p. 65.

221. benedikt, michael. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 6, Sep-

tember 20, 1965, p. 61.

A. M. Sachs Gallery, New York, April 19-May 7, 1966.

222. Review: waldman, diane. Art News, New York, vol. 65,

no. 4, Summer 1966, p. 13.

DAVID NOVROS1941, Los Angeles, California

New York, 1964

Park Place Gallery, New York

Park Place Gallery, New York, January 23-February 24,

1966. David. Novros, Mark di Suvero and Dean Fleming.

237. Reviews: ashbery, john. Art News, New York, vol. 65,

no. 1, March 1966, p. 13.

238. Adrian, dennis. "New York", Artforum, Los

Angeles, vol. IV, no. 8, April 1966, p. 48.

KENNETH NOLAND1924, Asheville, North Carolina

From Washington to New York 1961

Lives South Shaltsbury, VermontAndre Emmerich Gallery, New York

For a full bibliography see no. 229.

223. greenberg, clement. "Louis and Noland", Art Inter-

national, Zurich, vol. IV, no. 5, May I960, pp. 26-29.

224. greenberg, clement. "After Abstract Expressionism",

Art International, Zurich, vol. VI, no. 8, October 25,

1962, pp. 24-32.

225. Norman Mackenzie Art Gallery, Regina, Canada, January

LARRY POONS1937, Tokyo, Japan

New York, 1938

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York

Green Gallery, New York, November 4-23, 1963.

239. Reviews: swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 62,

no. 7, November 1963, p. 19.

240. fried, michael. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VII, no. 10, January

16, 1964, p. 55-56.

241. Harrison, jane. Arts, New York, vol. 38,

no. 4, January 1964, p. 31.

242. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, Sep-

tember-October 1964, American Drawings. Text byLawrence Alloway.

63

243. Review: judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 39, noNovember 1964, p. 59.

Green Gallery, New York, February 10-March 6, 1965.

244. Reviews: baker, Elizabeth c. Art News, New York,vol. 64, no. 1, March 1965, p. 12.

245. judd, donald. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 3, April 1965,

pp. 74-75.

246. tillim, Sidney. "The Dotted Line", Arts, New York,

vol. 39, no. 5, February 1965, pp. 16-21.

247. JOHNSON, E. H. "Three Young Americans: Hinman,Poons, Williams", Oberlin College Bulletin, Oberlin

College, Oberlin, Ohio, vol. 22, no. 3, Spring 1965,

pp. 82-86.

248. Reprinted with minor changes as "Three New, Cool,

Bright, Imagists", Art News, New York, vol. 64, no. 42,

Summer 1965, pp. 42-44, 62-64.

249. kozloff, max. "Larry Poons", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. 3, no. 7, April 1965, pp. 26-29.

250. coplans, JOHN. "Larry Poons", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. 3, no. 9, June 1965, pp. 33-35.

EDWIN RUDA1922, New YorkResident New YorkPark Place Gallery, New York

251.

252.

253.

254.

Feiner Gallery, New York, March 9-April 6, 1963.

Review: sharpless, ti-grace a. Art News, New York,vol. 62, no. 2, April 1963, p. 56.

Globe Gallery, New York, April 10-May 6, 1962.

Review: edgar, Natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 61,

no. 4, Summer 1962, p. 58.

Great Jones Gallery, New York, May 3-20, 1960. Spoerri,

Kim, Forakis, Ruda.Review: Schuyler, james. Art News, New York, vol.

59, no. 3, May 1960, p. 20.

Park Place Gallery, New York, May 8-June 9, 1966.

Edwin Ruda and Peter Forakis.

Review: schjeldahl, peter. Art News, New York,vol. 65, no. 4, Summer 1966, p. 14.

ROBERT RYMAN1930, Nashville, TennesseeNew York, 1952

2, 257. Review: tyler, parker. Art News, New York, vol. 55,

no. 8, December 1956, p. 11.

Camino Gallery, New York, January 24-February 13,

1958.

258. Review: ashbery, john. Art News, New York, vol. 56,

no. 9, January 1958, p. 19.

Section 11, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, November10-29, 1958.

259. Reviews: burckhardt, edith. Art News, New York,vol. 57, no. 7, November 1958, p. 16.

260. b. b. Arts, New York, vol. 33, no. 2, November1958, p. 58.

Section 11, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, February9-27, 1960.

261. Reviews: a. s., Art News, New York, vol. 58, no. 10,

February 1960, p. 15.

262. mott, helen de. Arts, New York, vol. 34,

no. 5, February 1960, p. 67.

263. "Leon Polk Smith", Quadrum, Brussels, no. 12, 1961,

pp. 150-151.

See bibliography no. 144.

Stable Gallery, New York, January 2-20, 1962.

264. Reviews: raynor, vivien. Arts, New York, vol. 36, no. 5,

February 1962, p. 41.

265. swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 60,

no. 10, February 1962, p. 12.

266. ashton, dore. "New York Commentary",Studio, London, vol. 163, no. 828, April 1962,

p. 157.

267. gray, cleve. "The Artist in America: Anniversary

Album", Art in America, New York, vol. 51, no. 1,

February 1963, pp. 64, 76, 81.

Stable Gallery, New York, March 12-April 6, 1963.

268. Reviews: Campbell, Lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 62, no. 1, March 1963, p. 14.

269. tillim, Sidney. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 9,

May 1963, p. 107.

270. alloway, Lawrence. "Leon Smith: New Work and Its

Origin", Art International. Lugano, vol. VII, no. 4,

April 25, 1963, pp. 51-53.

271. brown, Gordon. "International Art Trends: U.S.A.: ThePurists", Art Voices, New York, vol. 2, no. 5, May 1963,

p. 19.

272. "A Conversation between Leon Polk Smith and d'Arcy

Hayman", Art and Literature, Lausanne, no. 3, Autumn-Winter 1964, pp. 82-103.

Galerie Chalette, New York, October 2-November 31,

1965.

273. Reviews: goldin, amy. Arts, New York, vol. 40, no. 1,

November 1965, p. 57.

274. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art Inter-

national, Lugano, vol. X, no. 1, January 20,

1966, p. 92.

275. smith, leon. Portfolio of Draivings, Galerie Chalette,

New York, 1965.

255.

256.

LEON POLK SMITH1906, Chickasha, OklahomaNew York, 1950

Galerie Chalette, New York

Mills College of Education Gallery, New York, November22-December, 1955.

Reviews: mellow, james r. Arts, New York, vol. 30,

no. 3, December 1955, p. 54.

tyler, parker. Arts News, New York, vol. 54,

no. 9, January 1956, p. 68.

Camino Gallery, New York, December 1956.

FRANK STELLA1936, Maiden, Massachusetts

New York, 1958

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York

276. "Three Young Americans", Oberlin College Bulletin,

Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio, vol. 17, no. 1, Fall 1959,

pp. 18-19.

See bibliography no. 142.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, September 27-October

15, 1960.

277. Reviews: mott, helen de. Arts, New York, vol. 35, no. 1,

October 1960, p. 64.

278. Petersen, valerie. Art Neivs, New York,

vol. 59, no. 7, November 1960, p. 17.

279. sandler, irving H. "New York Letter", Art

International, Zurich, vol. IV, no. 9, Decem-ber 1, 1960, pp. 25-26.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, April 28-May 19, 1962.

280. Reviews: Campbell, lawrence. Art News, New York,

vol. 61, no. 4, Summer 1962, p. 17.

281. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 36, no. 10,

September 1962, p. 51.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, October 16-November 7,

1962. Frank Stella and John Chamberlain.

282. Reviews: ashton, dore. Das Kunstwerk, Baden-Baden,

vol. XVI, nos. 5-6, November 1962, p. 69.

283. fried, michael. "New York Letter", Art

International, Zurich, vol. VI, no. 9, Novem-ber 1962, pp. 54-55.

284. raynor, vivien. Arts, New York, vol. 37, no. 3,

December 1962, p. 46.

285. sandler, irving h. Art News, New York, vol.

61, no. 8, December 1962, p. 54.

286. Gottlieb, carla. "Pregnant Woman, the Flag, the Eye:

Three New Themes in Twentieth Century Art", Journal

ofAesthetics, Cleveland, vol. 21, no. 2, Winter 1962, p. 181

.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, Januarv 4-February 6,

1963.

287. Revieiv: ashton, dore. Studio, London, vol. 165, no.

838, February 1963, p. 67.

Ferus Gallery, Los Angeles, February 18, 1963.

288. Reviews: langsner, jules. "Los Angeles Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. VII, no. 3, March

25, 1963, p. 75.

289. factor, donald. "Los Angeles", Artforum,

San Francisco, vol. 1, no. 11, May 1963, p. 44.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, January 4-30, 1964.

290. Review: swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 62,

no. 10, February 1964, p. 11.

291. lippard, lucy r. "New York", Artforum, San

Francisco, vol. II, no. 9, March 1964, p. 19.

292. fried, michael. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. VII, no. 3, April

25, 1964, p. 59.

293. kozloff, max. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VII, no. 3, April 25,

1964, p. 64.

See bibliography no. 227.

Kasmin Limited, London, September 29-October 24,

1964.

294. Reviews: lynton, norbert. "London Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VIII, no. 10, Decem-ber 1964, pp. 44-^5.

295. BARO, gene. Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 4,

January 1965, p. 73.

296. judd, donald, "Local Historv", Arts Yearbook 7, NewYork 1964, pp. 22-35.

297. "A Portfolio of Recent Paintings", Arts Yearbook 7, NewYork, 1964, p. 61.

298. leider, philip. "Small but Select", Frontier, Los Angeles,

vol. 16, no. 5, March 1965, pp. 21-22.

299. rosenblum, Robert. "Frank Stella: Five Years of Varia-

tion on an 'Irreductible' Theme", Artforum, San Fran-

cisco, vol. Ill, no. 6, March 1965, pp. 21-25.

300. leider, philip. "Frank Stella", Artforum, San Francisco,

vol. Ill, no. 9, June 1965, pp. 24-26.

Ferus Gallery, Los Angeles, January 26, 1965.

301. Review: marmer, nancy. "Los Angeles Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 4, May1965, pp. 43^4.

302. kozloff, max in The Critic and the Visual Arts, NewYork, A.F.A., 1965, pp. 46-54. Paper given at A.F.A.

52nd Biennial Convention, Boston.

303. Reprinted as "Critical Schizophrenia and the Intentionalist

Method", The New Art, edited by Gregory Battcock,

New York, E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1966, pp. 123-135.

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, March 5-29, 1966.

304. Reviews: kozloff, max. The Nation, New York, vol.

202, no. 13, March 28, 1966, p. 370-372.

305. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, Switzerland, vol. X,

no. 10, Summer 1966, p. 113.

NEIL WILLIAMS1934, Bluff, UtahNew York, 1959

Andre Emmerich Gallery, New York

Green Gallery, New York, May 6-30, 1964.

306. Reviews: fried, michael. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6,

Summer 1964, p. 82.

307. Johnston, jill. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 4, Summer 1964, p. 17.

308. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 10,

September 1964, p. 62.

See bibliography no. 247 and no. 248.

309. lippard, lucy r. "New York Letter", Art International,

Lugano, vol. IX, no. 2, March 1965, pp. 46+

.

Dwan Gallery, Los Angeles, February 15-AIarch 12, 1966.

310. Revieivs: factor, don. "Los Angeles", Artforum, Los

Angeles, vol. IV, no. 8, April 1966, p. 14.

311. von meier, kurt. "Los Angeles Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 5, May 1966,

p. 58.

JACK YOUNGERMAN1926, Louisville, KentuckyNew York, 1956

Betty Parsons Gallery, New \ ork

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, March 10-28, 1958.

312. Reviews: dash. r. warren. Arts. New York, vol. 36,

no. 6, March 1958, p. 57.

313. schuyler, james. Art News, New York, vol.

57, no. 1, March 1958, p. 16.

314. "New Talent USA", Art in America, New York, vol. 47,

no. 1, Spring 1959, p. 47.

See bibliography no. 142.

Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, January 11-30, 1960.

315. Reviews: a. s. Art News, New York, vol. 58, no. 10,

February 1960, p. 14.

316. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 34, no. 5,

February 1960, p. 59.

317. ashton, dore. Arts and Architecture, Los

65

Angeles, vol. 77, no. 3, March 1960, p. 35.

Bettv Parsons Gallery, New York, March 31-April 25,

1964.

318. Reviews: edgar, natalie. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 3, May 1964, p. 15.

319. judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 9,

May-June 1964, p. 37.

320. rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6,

Summer 1964, p. 78.

321. benedikt, MICHAEL. "Youngerman : Liberty in Limits",

Art News, New York, vol. 64, no. 5, September 1965,

pp. 43-45, 54-55.

Betty Parsons and Byron Galleries, New York, Sep-

tember 28-October 23, 1965. (paintings and drawings

respectively)

322. Reviews: goldin, amy. Arts, New York, vol. 40, no. 1,

November 1965, p. 58.

323. ashton. dore. Studio International, London,

vol. 170, no. 872, December 1965, p. 250.

324. berkson, william. Arts, New York, vol. 40,

no. 2, December 1965, p. 51.

325. lippard, lucy r. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. X, no. 1, January

20, 1966, p. 92.

326. Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, Massachusetts, No-

vember 4, 1965-January 2, 1966. Paintings and Drawingsby Jack Youngerman. Text by Daniel Catton Rich.

327. rose, Barbara. "An Interview with Jack Youngerman",

Artforum, Los Angeles, vol. IV, no. 5, January 1966,

pp. 27-30.

338.

339.

no. 1, March 1966, p. 66.

krauss, ROSALIND. "New York", Artforum,

Los Angeles, vol. IV, no. 8, April 1966, p. 48.

kollmar, richard. Games, New York, A Lines Book,

1966. Cover bv Zox.

LAWRENCE ZOX1936, Des Moines, Iowa

New York, 1958

Kornblee Gallery, New York

American Gallery, New York, May 1962.

328. Review: swenson, g. r. Art News, New York, vol. 61,

no. 5, September 1962, p. 16.

Kornblee Gallery, New York, February 4-22, 1964.

329. Reviews: judd, donald. Arts, New York, vol. 38, no. 6,

February 1964, p. 71.

330. levin, kim. Art News, New York, vol. 62, no.

10, February 1964, p. 19.

331. rose, Barbara. "New York Letter", Art In-

ternational, Lugano, vol. VIII, nos. 5-6,

Summer 1964, p. 80.

Kornblee Gallery, New York, February 20-March 11,

1965.

332. Reviews: Johnston, jill. Art News, New York, vol. 63,

no. 10, February 1965, p. 14.

333. greene, sue. Art Voices, New York, vol. 4,

no. 1, Winter 1965, p. 103.

334. lippard, lucy R. "New York Letter", Art

International, Lugano, vol. IX, no. 2, March1965, p. 61.

335. raynor, vivien, Arts, New York, vol. 39, no. 7,

April 1965, p. 66.

Kornblee Gallerv, New York, Januarv 8-February 3,

1966.

336. Reviews: berkson, william. Arts, New York, vol. 40,

no. 5, March 1966, p. 53.

337. berrigan, ted. Art News, New York, vol. 61,

PHOTOGRAPHIC CREDITSAll photographs except the following were made by Robert E. Mates and Paul Katz:

Oliver Baker Associates, New \ork: p. 13

Geoffrey Clements, New \ork: pp. 32, 46

John A. Ferrari, Brooklyn: p. 51

Jonathan Holstein, New York: p. 53

Edward Kasper, New York: pp. 14. 15

Marion F. Mecklenburg, Washington, D.C.: p. 37

Robert Murray, New York: p. 48

Hans Namuth, New York: p. 12

0. E. Nelson, New York: p. 52

Eric Pollitzer, Garden City Park, New York: pp. 29, 41, 50

\\ alter Rosenblum, Long Island City, New York: p. 33

Walter J. Russell. New York: p. 12

THE SOLOMON R. GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM

STAFF

Director Thomas M. Messer

Curator Lawrence Alloway

Associate Curator Louise Averill Svendsen

Research Fellows Diane Waldman and Rose-Carol W ashton

Librarian Mary Joan Hall

Public Affairs

Membership

Registrar

Conservation

Photography-

Custodian

Everett Ellin

Carol Tormey

Alice Hildreth Goldman

Orrin Riley and Saul Fuerstein

Robert E. Mates

Jean Xceron

Business Administrator Glenn H. Easton, Jr.

Administrative Assistant

Office Manager

Purchasing Agent

Sales Supervisor

Building Superintendent

Head Guard

Viola H. Gleason

Agnes R. Connolly

Elizabeth M. Funghini

Judith E. Stern

Peter G. Loggin

Fred C. Mahnken

Exhibition 66/4 September-November, 1966

2,000 copies of this catalogue

designed by Herbert Matter

have been printed by Joh. Enschede en Zonen, Haarlem, Holland

in August 1966

for the Trustees of The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation

on the occasion of the exhibition

"Systemic Painting"

THE SOI 0>I0\ II. i.l 4.4.IMItl>l MISIIM

071 FIFTH AVKM K. XKW VOIIK 1 002»