Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism.
LONDON — Entered through a set of heavy double doors, Room One in London’s National Gallery is a small and self-sufficient space, leading to nowhere but itself. This self-sufficiency makes it ideal for the intense scrutineering of very few works. In this case, eleven works by David Bomberg are on display, all of which are drawings or paintings. Can a small display in a space as constrained as this one really do justice to the career of a poor Jewish boy from the East end of London, who blazed like Modernist comet through the city’s stuffy art world during the second decade of the twentieth-century?
The difficulty with Young Bomberg and the Old Masters is that its theme is too ambitious for the space allotted. It is forever yearning to suck into one room much of what is beyond its walls and contentedly hanging elsewhere in this very building — impossible, of course. Which leads me to ask this question: why did the curators present in such a finite form what could have been so much bigger, more ambitious, and more intellectually adventurous?
Its thesis, quite simply put, is this: though Bomberg may have been a pioneer of abstraction, an heir of Futurism and Cubism, and a truly memorable debunker of the past — he once quipped “I hate the Fat Men of the Renaissance” — the truth is a little more nuanced. In fact, he loved Botticelli, Bellini, Michelangelo, El Greco and others, and he spent hours learning from them here at the National Gallery. This show puts a few choice works of the New (by Bomberg) beside two choice works of the Old in order to demonstrate exactly what and how he learnt from them. What a good idea! But it is an idea which fails because it presents too little evidence to demonstrate its truth — and it is true!
At this point we descend into absurdity mixed with more than a modicum of frustration. There are nine Bombergs here, one painting by Sandro Botticelli — “Portrait of a Young Man” (c.1480-5), and another by El Greco. And then there are the tantalizing reproductions of those many other works elsewhere in the National Gallery by some of the artists named above, which we are only shown at thumbnail size. How ridiculous!
Beside the Botticelli, there hangs a self-portrait by Bomberg. We are encouraged to think about the fact that both portraits are forward-facing, eyes directly engaged with the onlooker, and that Bomberg admired so much the shirt that Botticelli’s handsome sitter was wearing, that he ordered one very similar for himself — and here he is wearing it! These then are the two bits of so called evidence of the influence of the past upon the present, and both are either frivolous or lightweight.
The real evidence of how Bomberg used the past to shape his approach to the representation of modernity is contained in the thumbnails of other works displayed beside El Greco’s “Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane” (c.1590), and the equally small-in-size, fact-filled gobbets of text which sit beside them.
The works by Bomberg in this room are some of his best, and two of them — “The Vision of Ezekiel” (1912) and “Ju-Jitsu” (c.1913) — hang beside preparatory drawings, and demonstrate at a stroke how he could shift from a drawing featuring a fairly schematized representation of humans in the mass, with simplified bodily forms rhythmically interlocking, to more brilliantly kaleidoscopic and abstracted variants of the same, rendered in color. It is as if he took two steps back, and partially re-imagined it all. What fascinates with Bomberg, always, is how coherent and moving this tortured interlocking of human forms manages to be, even when abstracted in this way, and especially so in “The Mud Bath” (1914). Where did he learn all this from? Walk across the room to squint at how Christ’s body is wrestled into uprightness in the thumbnail of Michelangelo’s “Entombment” (c.1500-1), the full-size original of which hangs a few galleries away from here.
Young Bomberg and the Old Masters continues at the National Gallery (Trafalgar Square, London) through March 1. The exhibition was organized by the National Gallery in partnership with Tate, and curated by Richard Cork.
The University of Virginia researchers wrote that the data “provides compelling evidence that these symbols are associated with hate.”
We are waiting for spectacle and when the quotidian, yet incongruous actions occur I wonder whether there is any real payoff coming.
Hear from Holly Jean Buck, Carolina Caycedo and David de Rozas, Simon Denny, Elizabeth Hoover, Renee Kemp-Rotan, Joseph Kunkel, and more at this free public event.
Tanega’s approach to mark-making comes across as stream of consciousness, as if she’s engaged in a conversation with herself.
Starting Monday, readers can borrow one of 50 rare and out-of-print titles, mailed to them completely free of charge, from Saint Heron Library.
EFA Open Studios offers a portal into the creative habitats of over 65 artists working in Manhattan’s longest-running studio program, including Dannielle Tegeder, Wafaa Bilal, Cui Fei, and Anina Major.
This is Yuskavage’s great gift, turning upside down our settled ways of thinking and seeing and, with ease, transforming the vulgar and ridiculous into the sublime.
51 international publishers and galleries showcase their latest editions in prints and artists’ books at this free public fair, which is fully online this year.
While hardly about the pandemic, or any of the other crises so afflicting us, all are invoked in this exhibition, which is also often tender and profoundly soulful.
These glowing, dynamic artworks reproduce something of Bosch’s chaotic energy, but on an immersive, multi-sensory scale.
This week, addressing a transphobic comedy special on Netflix, the story behind KKK hoods, cultural identity fraud, an anti-Semitic take on modern art, and more.