James Surls (Sculpture 69)
Duane Hanson (Sculpture 51)
Winifred Lutz (Sculpture 68)
The above exhibitions at Cranbrook Art Museum are of
the work of distinguished and notable Academy Alumni.
Each studied sculpture but, as is obvious, there is no one
style or dogma; only individual innovation and expression.
The installations occured at various times during 1977-94.
Exhibitions
As I started my tenure at Cranbrook, I was pleased to find that there was no exhibition program; most important, no commitments had been made except for one exhibition to be presented that September, 1977. Fortunately, that exhibition was “Design in Michigan”. Kathy and Mike McCoy, co chairs of the Design department were involved with this endeavor. Kathy had compiled and edited “Design in Michigan 1967/77”, published in by Wayne State University Press, Detroit, 1978. I was more than delighted to present the work of Michigan designers, many of whom were Academy graduates. As part of the installation, a helicopter was flown in and placed on the peristyle; unforgettable, as was the local interest and response.
During my time at Cranbrook, many exhibitions were presented; almost too many! The frantic schedule of exhibitions shown at the Corcoran seemed to continue at Cranbrook; with new shows and openings every six weeks. The ever changing exhibitions brought activity and attention to the museum but I realized that this was getting ridiculous? Work, preparation, time and money went into these catalogs and exhibitions that were shown for such a short time. The schedule changed so that fewer exhibitions were shown for a longer period of time. The staff, students, docents and members benefitted from having more time to study and appreciate the exhibitions and related programs.
Another change was with the members’ openings. When I arrived at Cranbrook, the openings were held late on Sunday afternoon. I could not think of a worse time as the weekend was ruined for everyone from staff to members. Those families that went away, for weekends at their cottage, had to return early. Even worse, the openings interfered with watching football games; husbands were upset at being dragged away from their television sets; I included!
I asked why the openings occurred on Sunday afternoons. No one seemed to know; that’s the way it had always been! Eventually, someone remembered that they had heard the openings were held that day because, on Monday, the maids could come in to tidy up and clean! What maids? We no longer had maids; they had left in 1950 with the Saarinen family. Here we were, nearly thirty years later, holding openings at the worst possible time because no one had asked the question: why?!
The members’ openings were changed to Friday evening at 5PM; everyone was happy and relieved. The openings became a popular way to start the weekend, now free for family and sports. The attendance at openings increased as did the interest in exhibitions. I was able to spend weekends away at the cottage; happily boating, fishing and watching sports!
Another decision that I made was in regard to the summer. During the summer, I decided that there would an exhibition of work by the graduates of the Academy. The show opened in mid May, at the time of commencement and ran through the summer. I felt that this gave visitors an opportunity to see the work of our graduates and, in doing so, promote the Academy. Later, “The Summer Show” was broadened to include the best of work, including some first year students. When the “Cranbrook Collection” was installed in the main gallery, the work of our students was seen within a broader context and ongoing tradition of excellence. Of course, this decision gave the museum staff time for research and preparation for future exhibitions. Most important, the summer was more relaxed for me, allowing time to cruise the Great Lakes.
I should mention that during the reorganization of the museum, I was helped by students and staff; particularly John Guse, a graduate of the Academy. His skills were invaluable as walls were removed and rebuilt. The entrance to the museum and the front desk was redesigned and rebuilt. Changes were ongoing. Near the front desk was a sign that welcomed visitors and simply explained the mission of the museum. I wish each museum would do the same, particularly using the simple word: “Welcome!”
To summarize the numerous exhibitions is difficult if not impossible? The program presented the work of Academy artists; different media; contemporary art; ever changing exhibitions.
The work of the artists in residence was presented. Over the years, exhibition catalogs of their work were published, with my introductory essays. “Cranbrook Artists in Residence 1978”, shown in the fall of that year, presented the recent work of the faculty. Another exhibition “Artists in Residence 1984” was presented at the Grand Rapids Museum of Art and then at a private gallery in New York to coincide with the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s presentation of “Design in America: The Cranbrook Vision”. A year later, The United States Information Agency organized the exhibition “Cranbrook Contemporanea: Artistas Residentes 1985-86”” that toured South America, including Venezuela and Brazil. Solo exhibitions devoted to individual faculty members were presented, along with brochures on their work. Exhibitions and brochures were presented on artists of the past from Loja Saarinen to Harry Bertoia. The same was done for alumni who had distinguished themselves from Niels Diffrient to Winifred Lutz. An exhibition that celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Academy in 1982 was “CAA USA”; painting and sculpture by fifteen alumni. The selection and catalog essay was by Dennis Barrie, Midwest Director, Archives of American Art; he worked closely with Linda Dunne, museum administrator. In this way, the public were given an appreciation of the achievements and influence of Cranbrook artists throughout the world.
The museum also presented the work of area artists in a series “At Cranbrook”.
My personal favorite was “Downtown Detroit: Twenty One Artists”. I selected the artists but this was another collaborative effort involving staff and students. The catalog, an outstanding design by student Jim Houff, included my introduction along with essays by dealers, curators, collectors and critics. As I remember these shows and catalogs, I am grateful for the support of many individuals; like the exhibitions, too numerous to mention but thank you!
Yoko Ono Exhibit, Cranbrook '89
Yoko Ono "The Bronze Age" opening, September 1989
Yoko Ono meets with the press, deSalle Auditorium
Yoko Ono with RS and Pat Hartmann, Board Chair
Yoko Ono
Yoko Ono is a dear friend and an artist that I highly respect. Exhibitions of her work were presented at Cranbrook in 1989 and 1993. For her first exhibition “The Age of Bronze”, I wrote the following introduction.
“With great pleasure, I write these words on the occasion of the exhibition of the work of Yoko Ono. Personally, I am delighted that the work of this distinguished artist is being shown at Cranbrook Academy of Art Museum. I first met and heard Yoko Ono in the mid 1960s. At that time, I was Director of Post Graduate Studies at Leeds College of Art. Yoko Ono was regarded as one of the most avant-garde artists of the time and her performances, presentations and work were eagerly sought after in England and Europe.
“A few years later, I was able to see an exhibition of drawings done in collaboration between John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Of course, that relationship is known world wide. In a way, her celebrity status has over shadowed Yoko Ono’s reputation and achievements as an artist.
“Accordingly to see her exhibition at the Whitney Museum of American Art earlier this year (1989) was a pleasant surprise….I was eager to bring an even bigger exhibition to Cranbrook in order to reaffirm the position of Yoko Ono with the aesthetic vanguard.”
Through the collectors, Lila and Gil Silverman and their Fluxus Collection, I met Jon Hendricks, who was a friend and curator for Yoko Ono. He arranged for me to visit her at the Dakota; I did so with Agnes. Subsequently, we have become close; a friendship that we cherish and respect. I will say no more except to quote again from my catalog introduction: “Yoko Ono is a remarkable woman and artist: sensitive, caring and innovative. Her ideas have influenced many younger artists. To see her work at Cranbrook is most appropriate.”
Both exhibitions were most successful; with huge crowds and great press. The first exhibition presented 60 works of art with bronzes, paintings, drawings, photographs and writings. The work was a retrospective of her innovative ideas and international influence. Yoko Ono was generous with her time; she gave a lecture/ performance and met with students. I will always remember one of our graduate students, a woman in her late twenties, coming up to Yoko and shaking her hand. With deep sincerity and emotion, the young woman said, “I want to thank you most sincerely. As a woman and an artist, you are my inspiration. You have changed my life.”
Sam Gilliam 1975 Corcoran Installation
below 1977 Sam Gilliam's Cranbrook Installation in main gallery with work by Martin Myers and Terence La Noue in the exhibition 'Viewpoint 77'. Also in picture: (l) Mary Ann Igna (r) Linda Dunne.
Viewpoint
My commitment and involvement is with contemporary art. At Cranbrook, I presented a series of exhibitions on contemporary American painting. I selected the artists and wrote the catalog for each exhibition; the series was titled “Viewpoint”. The first presentation was in the fall of 1977 and dealt with paintings that are no longer stretched in the formal sense upon a canvas stretcher. The work included the large hanging canvases of Sam Gilliam to free standing painted structures of skyscrapers by Martin Meyers.
I had shown the large hanging canvases of Gilliam in the large galleries of the Corcoran; now, I had the opportunity to do the same in the main museum gallery at Cranbrook. However, I was cautious as I did not want to overwhelm the Academy with my friends and artists from Washington DC. I had felt the same when arriving at the Corcoran. I did not bring in British artists but rather sought out artists within the community; that was easy in Washington DC with an outstanding group of innovative artists. The same was true at Cranbrook where there were the artists of the Academy and of Detroit. Moreover, my resources and riches in contemporary art were considerable; as were my contacts with artists, dealers and collectors across the country.
These contacts were invaluable as was evident in the “Viewpoint” series that continued as one of my favorite shows. Of course, that was inevitable as I selected the theme and the artists; also I wrote the catalog. As a painter, my bias and knowledge were the basis of the shows; dealing with new developments and trends in contemporary painting. In my extensive travels, I visited studios; galleries; museums; and collections. I was always looking for new ideas in painting. My passion was intensified as some critics wrote of video and film as the art form of the future; painting was dead. What nonsense! Humans will always make marks and have done so since the dawn of civilization. What is more mysterious and magical than those early paintings in the caves of our ancestors?! The magic of the mark will continue as long as humankind. Even in the horror of the holocaust, prisoners made drawings. The will to survive and live is strong; as is the desire to make marks, to create images and ideas visually.
Gene Davis 'Magic Circle' 1975 Corcoran rotunda.
Gene Davis 'Black Yo-Yo' 1981 Cranbrook main gallery
Viewpoint 81
“In January 1981, six artists created works for the gallery walls in the Museum. The works were made specifically for the spaces in the museum and existed only for the time of the exhibition. This publication acknowledges and records these monumental paintings. The museum, designed by Eliel Saarinen in 1940, affords magnificent spaces for contemporary art…..the changing of the interior became of prime interest in Viewpoint 81”
These words were the beginning of the introduction to the exhibition, the second of the series. The artists invited to participate were Gene Davis, Sol LeWitt, Patrick Ireland, Dorothea Rockburne, Rick Paul and Daniel Buren. Other extracts from the brochure follow; giving insights into the concept.
The transient nature of the paintings, lasting only a few weeks, is both an attraction and frustration. To be able to take risks and create a work of a passing moment attracts many artists….The opportunity to deal with new spaces and scale allows the artist to experiment, innovate and grow. Although the work does not endure….In past years, the tendency has occurred to say that painting ‘is finished’, ‘is done with’, ‘has no future’. “Viewpoint 81” confirms that painting is vital and vibrant with potential. The act of painting will continue to fascinate and offer much to explore and discover for the artists and the viewer, presenting ever changing viewpoints of art.”
Gene Davis was an artist from my days at the Corcoran; where he taught at the school and exhibited at the gallery. Davis had gained an international reputation through his endless paintings of stripes. Through the use of vertical stripes, color, interval and repetition, he created large canvases that were a visual orchestration. I admired his work and regarded Gene as a friend. For the 1976 Corcoran Biennial, I had invited him to create a work for the exhibition; “ Magic Circle” covered the walls of the Rotunda. The work lives on in the memory of those fortunate enough to have experienced this painting that encircled and enveloped the viewer. Gene Davis was used to creating works of monumental scale that were transient and of that moment. His enormous stripe painting on the road in front of the Philadelphia Museum of Art is fully documented as are other works. As usual, information is readily available on Davis, other artists and whatever on the internet.
At Cranbrook, Gene Davis created the work “Black Yo-Yo” in the museum’s main gallery. The work was executed by Academy students working ( pictured above) from the artist’s design, developed by Davis after an earlier visit to the museum. For ten days, students worked intensely to complete the painting; the artist was pleased.
The critic Joy Colby wrote of “fracturing the 104 feet of running space with two paintings on facing walls – one black with gray stripes and one dark blue with lighter blue stripes. The intervals between the stripes are reversed in the two paintings to set a softly rolling cadence down the walls and lights spotting the painting emphasize unfolding rhythms.” Gene Davis said of the work that “The Cranbrook piece has to do with fracturing the unity of the room by creating a gentle conflict between the two walls….I decided it should be a gentle fracture; you can see a conflict, a tug between the two sides but it is a very gentle tug.” Whatever, the critic or artist said, I felt that the work was a great success; in a dramatic way, enriching the walls and transforming the space.
To achieve this modern mural had required the commitment and work of those students. The painting students had worked hard but benefitted a great deal, learning a lot from the experience. The Cranbrook Museum fulfilled many roles, most important was the ongoing education and enrichment of the student. Exhibitions and lectures were obvious and ongoing benefits; other opportunities were less apparent. Students were encouraged to work within the museum as preparators in preparing and installing exhibitions; to help with lighting; to unpack and pack works of art; to catalog; to write labels; design invites and catalogs; to assist in the bookstore; to work at openings. In many of these activities, students were part of student work program and gained financial aid. I always said that I had the best museum staff, particularly the student work crew; many had prior professional experience in galleries or as designers. In all this activity, one of the most invaluable experiences was working directly with artists; either in an installation or on a site specific work as in the ‘Viewpoint’ series. For the 1981 presentation, students were responsible for the Gene Davis painting and also worked on other installations, particularly the painting of the walls in the south gallery for the white chalk geometric figures of Sol LeWitt. Students not only worked within the museum but were most involved with the program of sculpture on the grounds. Sculpture students worked on the construction and installation of works by sculptors from Alice Aycock to Dennis Oppenheim. Of course, the artists benefitted from the work of the students who in turn learnt so much from this aesthetic apprenticeship. Through exhibitions and installations, the opportunities were endless for students to be involved with artists in the creative process.
In my conclusion to the publication on “Viewpoint 81”, I wrote “The transient nature of all these works is one of the fascinating aspects of the exhibition. The works will remain in memory and documentation but not as object. The changing of our perception to the environment and the experience of these monumental paintings should remain as a stimulating and everlasting memory for those who were fortunate to view the works.”
Out of Square
The third in the ‘Viewpoint’ series was presented in 1984 with the title “Out of Square”; paintings no longer within the traditional rectangle but that were shaped canvas. Indeed, in 1965, Lawrence Alloway had organized an exhibition for the Guggenheim titled “The Shaped Canvas”. The idea of the shaped canvas had fascinated artists for decades.
In my own work, I had experimented with such paintings; I did a series of chevrons, shaped and shield like. The best of these is “Ivory Quartet” four shaped panels with acrylic; painted and later exhibited at the Kidd Gallery in 1981. The work is now in the collection of Shirley & Frank Piku and is illustrated under ‘Paintings’ on this website. In the early 70s, I had painted some columns 72” x 8” x 8”; the intent was to break away from the flat rectangular canvas. The works were exhibited in Washington DC, initially at the Jefferson Place Gallery; then in my retrospective at the Pyramid Gallery. Again, under ‘Paintings’, there is slide of that 1977 installation showing a black column; also a diamond shaped painting. Later that year, after my arrival in Michigan, I went to the home of Lila & Gil Silverman. I was surprised and delighted to find two of my column paintings among their large and impressive collection. Recently, I have returned to that column form; fascinated by the fact the three sides can never be seen at once. The viewer has to walk around the work; viewing art is not a passive enterprise.
Of course, I suppose it is not quite proper to be talking of my own work while discussing my exhibitions as a museum director. Well, that is the privilege of old age and retirement, I can do as I wish; particularly on my own web site? Moreover, these reminisces give insights into my interests; the rationale and reason for certain exhibitions.
“Out of Square” showed the wide diversity of ideas and ongoing possibilities for the shaped canvas. Art becomes object rather than representation. The exhibition presented the work of twenty two artists. One of the pioneers of the shaped canvas in the 60s was Charles Hinman; his was the first shaped canvas that I saw in America. Apparently, Ellsworth Kelly was credited with making the first shaped canvas in 1952. Frank Stella was another artist breaking away from the rectangle; as were others. Hinman and Stella were included in the ‘Viewpoint 81’ exhibition; along with Mel Bochner, Ron Gorchov, Elizabeth Murray, Judy Pfaff, Ellen Phelan, Alan Shields, Gilda Snowden and John Torreano to name but a few. Experimentation, diversity, abstraction, figuration and innovation were evident throughout the show; a testimony to the rich potential and promise of painting.
As part of the exhibition, the work of George Ortman was included along with, in the brochure, his statement “A Perspective”. Ortman was Head of Painting at the Academy. He wrote of his days in Paris; then New York during its heyday in the 50s. George was working on his painted and built constructions. He writes “To me, it was a way I could explore. Once the picture plane was cut into, much was to be done. I could now deal with illusion and reality, the painted image in context with an invented object or found object. I could introduce new materials. A picture plane could be not only paint but plaster, aluminum, wood, cloth or anything I could get my hands on. It offered the opportunity to work with relief, to make colors work in a new way and to work with light and shadow. The possibilities were exciting.”
The Third Dimension
'Viewpoint 86': Judy Pfaff and Al Held
The fourth and final of the ‘Viewpoint’ series was presented in 1986, titled “Painting and the Third dimension”. Without doubt, this exhibition was one of my favorites, with the finest catalog; a brilliant design by an academy student, David Frej. I worked hard on the essay; a culmination of my thoughts on painting developed over the years.
I was once told that to quote oneself was not proper; was gauche? Well, I do not agree; often I think what I write makes the most sense; at least to me it does! As I have said, old age and one’s own website, does allow indulgences. I wish that I could share all my catalog writings; may be one day, by scanning, I will? For now, extracts will suffice, starting with the following.
“The current exhibition, Viewpoint 86: Painting and the Third Dimension, presents the work of American painters of national renown. The seven painters deal with the issue of space in different ways in their work which ranges from figuration to abstraction. These painters continue to be fascinated with the creation of the illusion of deep space on a flat surface or space that perceptually pushes outward from the canvas or works which physically extend into actual space.”
“Throughout time, space has fascinated viewer and artist alike. Space can be the vast cosmos of the universe or the immediate space in which we live. The interpretations of space and spatial relationships have intrigued the artists for centuries. In the late Middle Ages, the artist began to create the illusion of recession and depth through mathematical perspective. The artist persuaded the viewer that upon looking a t a flat surface, the illusion of three dimensional depth was implied and that, for example, a road vanished into the distance. The use of foreground, middle distance and far distance appeared to give depth to the paintings. The manipulation of surface and space has continued to fascinate, frustrate and fulfill the eye of the painter.’
I went on to write of space; perspective; perception; illusion; interpretation; imagination; representation and abstraction. I described the evolution of painting from the caves through the Renaissance to cubism and modernism. I mentioned painters from the Renaissance: Masaccio, Uccello, Mantegna and Caravaggio to those of Modern Art: Cezanne, Picasso, Braque and Matisse. I described how each had dealt with spatial illusion. I then went on to write of the exhibition, of the seven painters and their work: Jennifer Bartlett, Jonathan Borofsky, John Egner, Al Held, Philip Pearlstein, Judy Pfaff and Philip Wofford. Some extracts follow from the catalog, mentioning a few of the painters who most dramatically illustrated the theme of painting and the third dimension; starting with Al Held.
“The paintings of Al Held illustrate to perfection a perception and puzzlement of space. His earlier black and white series are masterful examples of how geometric and abstract form can still be placed and manipulated in an endless illusion. His latest work, where colors contrast and converge with form, gives an even greater cosmic space.”
Jennifer Bartlett "Sea Wall" 1985.
“Over the past years, Jennifer Bartlett has been a prolific painter. Her recent works, scenes of houses, cabanas, boats, pools and fences, comprise painted objects that exist as two dimensional representation on canvas and as scaled, three dimensional extensions of the scene in front of the canvas. These installations explore the progression of a motif from depicted space into actual space. In ‘Sea Wall’ 1985, presented in this exhibition, the relationship between depicted and actual spaces is obvious. Objects are painted upon the canvas and then these objects are recreated in actual space. The entire work is a commentary upon the illusion of objects….”
Judy Pfaff "Apples and Oranges" 1986
“The work of Judy Pfaff poses many questions and challenges the perceptions and traditions of painting. The movement into actual space is evident; not so apparent is the feeling of breaking away from the rectangle. The structures still relate to the wall, an implied canvas, from which the forms move forward, struggling for release and going beyond the bounds, unhindered and uninhibited. Her work also relates to the issues of room and environment, but in gesture, movement, composition and intent remain paintings.”
My essay finishes by discussing the writings of Rudolph Arnheim and E. H. Gombrich. A visiting lecturer at Cranbrook, Arnheim writes of two spatial systems: “cosmic” and “parochial”. In his book, “Art and Illusion”, Gombrich has a chapter “Ambiguities of the Third Dimension” in which he talks of “our baffled perception” and “the elusive tangle of unresolved ambiguities”.
The last word and final quote came from our son John, at that time 11 years old. On seeing the huge and cosmic paintings of Al Held, he said, “Looks as if you can walk into it. Can you?”
DeSalle Auditorium
At the time of the reopening of the south gallery, the presentation of space as an exhibition theme was most appropriate. Converted to use as a lecture hall, this space was returned to its original use and purpose as a gallery; the first exhibition shown was “Painting and The Third Dimension”. Like the main gallery, the south was large space, 79’ x 31’; perfect for contemporary art. The reclaiming of this gallery space was made possible with the construction of a new auditorium. The generous gift of the late Peggy deSalle had made possible the building of the Albert and Peggy deSalle Auditorium, which opened at the same time of the exhibition, November 1986.
Peggy was born in Hungary in 1904 and arrived with her family in Detroit six years later. Her first marriage was to the painter Zoltan Sepeshy, also Hungarian. He was Head of Painting at the Academy, later becoming the second president. In 1933, Peggy married Albert deSalle. In 1949, she opened the Little Gallery. During her life, she befriended and supported artists and musicians. Peggy was a colorful character, a dear friend and supporter of the Academy. Her financial gift made the possible the auditorium; she also gave gifts of art from her personal collection. In 1984, at an Academy party celebrating her eightieth birthday, Peggy deSalle officially gave her gift; she died two years later, before the completion of the construction. Her memory and name lives on.
The deSalle Auditorium was designed by the architects Robert Swanson, the grandson of Eliel Saarinen, and George Zonnars, an alumnus of the Academy. Their design placed the auditorium under the propylaeum that linked library and museum. In this way, Saarinen’s original design remained intact and the Academy gained an impressive, underground auditorium that seated 200. The programs of the academy and museum were enhanced through this generous gift and architectural addition. Not only did Peggy deSalle deserve thanks; other donors made possible the completion of this unique undertaking. These fund raising efforts were coordinated by Agnes (Fleckenstein) Slade; she is owed a debt of gratitude.
The building of the auditorium allowed the museum to implement its plan to reorganize its spaces. The lecture hall became again a gallery; the bookstore was enlarged; lower galleries renovated and expanded; and additional storage space provided. Most important was the installation in the main gallery of the Cranbrook Collection.
