Customer Reviews

Abstract Expressionism and the Modern Experience

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Polcari's estimate of the blanket: abstract expressionism. Doesn't do service to many of the painters that interest me the most.He gives too much praise to Hoffman and Gottleib. Gottleib was an out and out commercial fine art painter.His last work became handsome stereotypes of modern art.Drawing is important in A.E and Hoffamn and Gottleib aren't that great as draftsman. Some of Adolph's work was taking Klee to a bigger scale. Few of the A.E. boys followed Klee.Hoffman is over-rated and his reputation has been built up by his many archly loyal students.He taught nothing more than basic design. Rothko when he was at Brooklyn College states that he was against design.Baziotes,Reinhardt deserve more attention. Miro thought Baziotes was the best of the lot. I find William Seitz's work on Abstract Expressionism more interesting . It is more thoroughly researched.Seitz shows the unity of subject matter of the New York painters. Motherwell was an important source of the intellectual ideas and roots of A.E..The book includes a chart of the roots of the movement according to Robert Motherwell. Recent monographs of Rothko and DeKooning are important to read.No one has bothered to talk to some of the minor artists who were influenced by the group.I was told that Joseph Stella's( Brooklyn bridge, MOMA) (Delaunay's The City, Guggenheim New York ) and Mondrian's presence in NYC: were important influences on these painters. One major theme is the urban landscape.Polcari has done a very good job . The book doesn't have as many color repros as the Seitz book on A.E..Both,deal effectively with the technique of automatism of these painters. There are fundamental differences in the perception of the philosophy of the group. Polcari sees mysticism in these painters. Because of Motherwell the Seitz book emphasis is on ethics. Fundamental differences in understanding the painters.