BASEL, Switzerland — Fifty-five years ago, the exhibition The New American Painting arrived at the Kunsthalle Basel. It was the first stop on a yearlong tour that touted the work of seventeen Abstract Expressionists before eight European countries — the first comprehensive exhibition to be sent to Europe showing the advanced tendencies in American painting. Organized by the International Program of the Museum of Modern Art under the auspices of the International Council at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, the show was curated by Dorothy Miller and featured William Baziotes, James Brooks, Sam Francis, Arshile Gorky, Adolph Gottlieb, Philip Guston, Grace Hartigan, Franz Kline, Willem de Kooning, Robert Motherwell, Barnett Newman, Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, Theodoros Stamos, Clyfford Still, Bradley Walker Tomlin, and Jack Tworkov.
Director of MoMA at the time Alfred H. Barr, Jr. explained in a press release for the show that the artists in The New American Painting represented an individual liberty of style and expression. “None speaks for the others any more than he paints for the others,” he said. “Their individualism is uncompromising and as a matter of principle they do nothing deliberate in their work to make communication easy.”
The exhibition opened at the height of the Cold War, and for years it was rumored that it was all part of a secret CIA program aimed at promoting American ideals abroad — ideals that would later include the marketing of fast food and Walt Disney. The connection seemed improbable; after all, this was a period when the great majority of Americans disliked or even despised modern art. Even President Truman validated the popular view when he said: “If that’s art, then I’m a Hottentot.” However, the CIA connection was confirmed in a 1995 article published in the Independent.
Much time and history have passed since the heroic showing of The New American Painting. By the early 1960s, Pop art had surpassed Abstract Expression, and by the late 1960s, Minimalism and then Conceptual art had buried it. Today most of the art market still hedges its bets on contemporary art. So I was astonished to see postwar American painting and sculpture dominating the halls of the 44th edition of Art Basel. Could this be a response to the record sales recently recorded by New American Painting alums Barnett Newman and Jackson Pollock?
At Sotheby’s last month, Barnett Newman’s seminal painting “Onement VI,” a deep blue abstract composition from 1953, sold for $43.8 million, the result of a battle among five bidders. The price eclipsed Newman’s previous auction record by a margin of more than $20 million. The monumental 1953 painting was championed as one of the most important works by the artist ever to appear at auction and stands as a masterwork not only of Newman’s artistic enterprise, but of the entire Abstract Expressionist movement.
A day later at Christie’s Post-War & Contemporary Evening Sale, Jackson Pollock’s drip painting “Number 19, 1948” went for $58.4 million, nearly twice its presale estimate, achieving a world auction record for the artist. The bid helped shatter the record for highest sales at a single auction. Christie’s declared that the sale marked the start of “a new era” in the art market. Here’s a video of the aggressive bidding for the Pollock.
Postwar American art is hot, and the galleries exhibiting at Art Basel know it. With equal offerings in the category from both American and European dealers, I might even go so far as to suggest that having a work by one of the major figures of the New York School in a booth, regardless of whether or not the period is part of your gallery program, is a good strategy for engaging curators and attracting collectors.
With only a few hours to take in the fair, I noticed only five of the original artists from The New American Painting missing from my checklist: William Baziotes, James Brooks, Grace Hartigan, Theodores Stamos, and Clyfford Still. Here’s a list of those who were there.
- “Untitled,” work on paper, Barbara Mathes Gallery, New York, on view in the back room of the exhibition booth
- “Untitled” (1946), crayon on paper, 9 ½ x 12 in, Richard Gray Gallery, Chicago
- “Untitled” (1945–47), graphite and crayon on paper, 9 ½ x 12 ½ in, Richard Gray Gallery
- “Blast II” (1957), oil on canvas, 90 x 45 in, Leonard Hutton, New York
- “Untitled” (1967), acrylic on paper, 24 x 19 in, Galería Elvira González, Madrid
- “Armchair” (1969), acrylic on canvas, 42 x 48 in, McKee Gallery, New York
- “Plotters” (1969), oil on panel, 30 x 40 in, McKee Gallery, New York
- “Untitled (Three Hoods)” (19720, oil on paper, 23 x 28 in, Timothy Taylor Gallery, London
- “Room & Sea” (1978), oil on canvas, Hauser & Wirth, New York / London
- “Track” (1978), oil on canvas, 78 x 109 in, McKee Gallery, New York
- “Provincetown II” (1959), oil on canvas, 93 x 79 in, Mitchell-Innes & Nash, New York
Willem de Kooning:
- “Untitled” (1978), oil on canvas, 76 5/8 x 87 3/8 in, Hauser & Wirth, Zurich / London / New York
- “Untitled XIII” (1981), oil on canvas, 60 x 54 in, Matthew Marks, New York
- “Untitled” (19830, oil on canvas, Mnuchin Gallery, New York
- “Rome (double face)” (1959), work on paper, Mnuchin Gallery, New York
- “Elegy to the Spanish Republic” (1974–75), acrylic on canvas, 96 x 120 in, Bernard Jacobsen Gallery, London / New York. This painting was the highlight of an entire booth dedicated to Motherwell, including works dating from 1967 to 1991.
- “Untitled” (1959), ink on paper, Dominique Lévy Gallery, New York. The drawing was listed at $7 million and apparently on hold for a collector.
- “Untitled (Equine III)” (c. 1944), oil on canvas, 13 x 18 in, Washburn Gallery, New York
- “No. 1” (1957), oil on canvas, Helly Nahmad Gallery, New York / London
Bradley Walker Tomlin:
- “Number 10” (1949), oil on canvas, Pace, New York / Beijing / London
- “Abstraction” (c.1950), oil on Masonite, 19 7/8 x 23 7/8 in, Washburn Gallery, New York
- “Guardian I” (1952), oil on canvas, 50 x 21 in, Leonard Hutton, New York
- “June 21” (1964), oil on canvas, 62 x 80 in, Mitchell-Innes & Nash, New York
At Basel, there were a number of works by American artists of the period who weren’t included in The New American Painting show but have gone on to prove the continuing demand for art of the New York School. Highlights included a 1956 canvas by Joan Mitchell, which was priced at $6 million and among the early sales in the booth of the New York–based dealers Cheim & Read; “Construction on Star Points” (1954–56), a seminal work by sculptor David Smith; and possibly the most exciting offering at Mitchell-Innes & Nash, an enormous “unfurled” painting by color field painter Morris Louis titled “Beta Alpha” (1961).
Here’s more from that related list.
- “Untitled” (1958), oil and collage on board, 31 ½ x 40 ½ in, Leonard Hutton, New York
- “Beta Alpha” (1961), Magna on canvas, 100 x 154 in, Mitchell-Innes & Nash, New York
- “Untitled” (1956), oil on canvas, 80 ½ x 109 ½ in, Cheim & Read, New York
- “Composition” (1961), oil on canvas, 76 34 x 73 ½ x 1 ¾ in, Hauser & Wirth, New York, London
- “Untitled” (1964), oil on canvas, Galerie Max Hetzier, Germany
- “Untitled” (1965), oil on canvas, 57 ½ x 44 ¾ in, Cheim & Read, New York
- “Xavier” (1985), oil on canvas, 102 ¼ x 51 ¼ in, Kukje Gallery, Seoul / Tina Kim Gallery, New York
- “Once” (1987), oil on canvas 78 ½ x 71 in, Galerie Jacques de la Beraudiere
- “Untitled (Head, Blue and White)” (1934), oil on canvas, 14 x 24 in, Washburn Gallery, New York
- “Construction on Star Points” (1954–56), stainless steel and steel painted with red Iron primer, Galerie Gmurzynska, Zurich. Two works on paper by Smith, one from 1958 and another from 1963, were also on view at Gmurzynska.
- “Compass Circle” (1962), steel, 31 ¼ x 18 x 6 in, Richard Gray Gallery, Chicago
- “Untitled” (1962), spray enamel on canvas, 98 x 48 in, Moeller Fine Art, New York / Berlin
- “Six Benjamin Moore Paintings” (1961), Dominique Lévy Gallery, New York
- “Creed II” (1961), oil on canvas, Gagosian Gallery
- “Hollis Frampton” (1963), oil on canvas, Mnuchin Gallery, New York, a work named after the filmmaker, photographer, and critic Hollis Frampton (1936–84)
- “Black-White-Black Sketch” (1966), watercolor, ink, and graphite on printed paper, 17 3/8 x 22 1/9 in, Barbara Mathes Gallery, New York, on view in the back room of the exhibition booth
Art Basel 2013 took place June 13 to 16 at Messeplatz in Basel, Switzerland.
Special Edition: 🖌️Artists’ Signatures ✍️
In this special edition, we investigate what artists’ signatures actually mean, and the fascinating results reveal the multifaceted history of this curious phenomenon.
What Is a Signature in the Internet Age?
As a cryptographic unit for record-keeping, an NFT can be seen as analogous to a signature or an autograph.
The Public Theater Explores the Hurricane Katrina Diaspora in shadow/land
Written by Erika Dickerson-Despenza and directed by Candis C. Jones, this lyrical meditation on legacy, erotic fugitivity, and self-determination is on view in NYC.
The Meaning of Ancient Greek and Roman Artisan Signatures
What did a signature mean in the ancient world, and how much can we trust what they seem to tell us?
Michelangelo’s Signature and the Myth of Genius
Michelangelo served as a stellar example for future artists who sought status and economic independence.
The Rubin Museum Presents Death Is Not the End
Tibetan Buddhist and Christian works of art made across 12 centuries explore death, the afterlife, and the desire to continue to exist. On view in NYC.
Uncovering the Photographer Behind Arshile Gorky’s Most Famous Painting
As we pursue photographer Hovhannes Avedaghayan a fascinating picture begins to emerge of him and the world of which he was part.
100 Years of Artist Signatures in a Detroit Club
The beams in Detroit’s Scarab Club act as a guest book of sorts, carrying a wealth of stories and history, including signatures by Diego Rivera, Marcel Duchamp, Margaret Bourke-White, Isamu Noguchi, and others.
When I Am Empty Please Dispose of Me Properly
Ayanna Dozier, Ilana Harris-Babou, Meena Hasan, Lucia Hierro, Catherine Opie, Chuck Ramirez, and Pacifico Silano explore the myths of the American Dream at Brooklyn’s BRIC House.
The Myth of Agency Around Artists’ Signatures
In an art world built on shifting sands, artists’ signatures become symbols of agency for some, and relics of the past for others.
The Women Artists Commemorated on an NYC Sidewalk
The signatures of Rosa Bonheur, Mary Cassatt, and six other historical women artists are engraved on a small stretch of sidewalk on Manhattan’s Upper East Side.
Pratt’s 2023 Fine Arts MFA Thesis Exhibition Is On View in Brooklyn
The two-part exhibition features the work of 41 graduating artists across disciplines, including painting, sculpture, printmaking, and integrated practices.
Met Museum Repatriates 15 Objects to India
The sculptures were all at one point sold by the disgraced art dealer Subhash Kapoor.
Pussy Riot’s Nadya Tolokonnikova Placed on Russian “Wanted” List
Tolokonnikova has long been a thorn in the side of Vladimir Putin’s regime.
This is a comment received by email from a reader, Dana Gordon, who was unable to use the Disqus system. It is not mine and its posting does not reflect an editorial endorsement by Hyperallergic.
> Name: Dana Gordon
> Website: http://DanaGordon.net
> Comment: Jason Andrew inadvertently here writes a self-contradictory conundrum into his article. He is a champion of the abstract art of Bushwick and of Jack Tworkov, yet he subverts his own discerning taste.
> Postwar American art – the New York School, to be precise – was one of the greatest periods of art. Certainly a greater aggregate or “period” of art than anything that has happened since. And many artists continue to uphold the values and tradition of that period, including growing numbers of young artists. Why then is it necessary to continue the post-modern, Marxist, Oedipal, ad hominem habit of undermining it by associating it with the CIA and the Cold War? Let’s remember that guilt by association was a favorite tactic of McCarthyism. So the US government sponsored a show of abstract expressionism in other countries. So what? And good for it! The artists didn’t sign up with the CIA. Barr was absolutely right that they were great exponents of individualism and a freedom obtained in America…(Where was freer? Nazi Germany? Vichy France? Soviet Russia?). Furthermore, when the Mr. Andrew writes, “By the early 1960s, Pop art had surpassed Abstract Expression, and by the l
> ate 1960s, Minimalism and then Conceptual art had buried it”, he is writing of events of the art market, or of academia, but not of art, though he disappointingly fails to make the distinctions himself. The article is an odd juxtaposition, being full of images of art that author clearly admires but undermines….or maybe it’s the editors: ridiculing the grand gesture and America reigns supreme, and juxtaposing it with, associating it with, the rank commercialism of Art Basel. Anti-Americanism may be a badge of coolness (or of an acolyte of Howard Zinn), or a password of hip entree, but it’s no sign of original thinking.
> Dana Gordon
Thanks for your reply. I can see how you might have misinterpreted my assessment of American abstract art dominating Art Basel. For starters, it was my first trip to the international fair and as I wrote, I was “astonished” to see so much great postwar art which I do admire. Secondly, as a student of the period, I found it a great angle of discussion to link what I found at the fair back to the historic tour of The New American Painting exhibition (it’s link to the CIA is merely a side bar). By offering a complete list of works which I recorded at the fair I was offering proof and illustrating the depth of American painting offered at the fair. Of course linking it to the recent auction sales and the aggressive market place for such esteemed work seemed only elementary. I’m sorry to correct you but any blunt juxtapositions you are inferring were just not intended. The article celebrates the continuing appreciation and demand for American abstract art (without irony).
Posting another reply to you from Dana Gordon. Same disclaimers apply:
“Jason, I understand. My point is that it’s necessary to appreciate this art, and all real art, without political or market accoutrements. The whole idea of art has been poisoned for too long by academics, curators, dealers, critics (and of course artists themselves) feigning that art is impossible to get or exist without a political or market angle. Indeed, the autonomy of art and the artist was one of the messages of the abstract expressionists. I am just tired of every time I see an article about Ab Ex it comes with an apology about the CIA, or with a series of price tags. It’s really necessary now to write about art without considering the political or the commercial, or people will forget that art can be made without those considerations.
Of course when the “art” is made mainly or wholly within those considerations, then a critic should write about them, but as propaganda or product promotion, not art.
Comments are closed.