Customer Reviews


2 Reviews
5 star:    (0)
4 star:
 (1)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:
 (1)
1 star:    (0)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 
Only search this product's reviews

The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review


45 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars Color the Sixties Bright and Abstract
This book represents the catalog for a circulating museum show devoted to the prime movers (Morris Louis, Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski and Helen Frankenthaler) in the Color Field school of painting, also called "post-painterly abstraction" by Clement Greenberg, in order to differentiate it from the more autographic type of paint handling found in Abstract Expressionism,...
Published on November 8, 2007 by Michael Salcman

versus
6 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Good Content, Bad Binding
-very good essay, decent reproductions, good selection of Color Field paintings, BUT, the binding is bad. The inner hinge is very poorly designed: thin glossy paper glued to boards over rough cloth tape, which is very visible and ugly. This is one that would be better in paperback.
Published on May 26, 2008 by AC Painter


Most Helpful First | Newest First

45 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars Color the Sixties Bright and Abstract, November 8, 2007
By 
Michael Salcman (Baltimore, MD USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Color as Field: American Painting, 1950-1975 (American Federation of Arts) (Hardcover)
This book represents the catalog for a circulating museum show devoted to the prime movers (Morris Louis, Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski and Helen Frankenthaler) in the Color Field school of painting, also called "post-painterly abstraction" by Clement Greenberg, in order to differentiate it from the more autographic type of paint handling found in Abstract Expressionism, the style that preceded it. The advocacy of the autocratic and well-hated Greenberg, America's leading art critic of the 20th century, has done much to inhibit proper scholarly and market respect for the style. The essay by Karen Wilkin, an independent art historian with a long-standing interest in the subject, is clear, concise and beautifully illustrated. My major criticism is that the enthusiasm of the author leads her to several dubious conclusions and a general lack of critical and/or comparative thinking: none of the artists have weaknesses, everyone is a good and worthy contributor, in other words, "thank you for sharing". For example, both the exhibition and the essay try to make the case for a number of secondary, even minor or weak artists (e.g. Walter Darby Bannard and Friedl Dzubas) as vital members of the movement. There is also an attempt to include major abstract expressionists like Hans Hofmann, Robert Motherwell, Barnet Newman and Mark Rothko in the group rather than considering them strictly as precursors or major influences on the development of the style. The primacy of Frankenthaler over Louis is also subtly argued for and highly debatable; the invention of a technique (the stained and poured canvas) is not the same as making a dramatic change in the quality and intent of an art form. There is a structural clarity, chromic inventiveness, absence of draughtmanship and coolness in Louis and Noland that is quite distinct from the decorative and tasteful art of Frankenthaler; these features make Color Field painting in their hands a close relation or precursor (as Wilkin points out) to 1960s Minimalism. At the same time, it is very refreshing to see an important writer give some credit, in proper proportion I might add, to Sam Gilliam, an African-American and a Washington artist like Noland and Louis, and to Ronald Davis, a Californian, who is more often remembered, if at all, in relation to the reductive abstraction of Frank Stella. Overall, this is an extremely fine contribution to the field; it covers the widest number of artists and properly situates Color Field painting alongside Minimalism and Pop as one of the major artistic developments of the turbulently productive 1960s.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars Good Content, Bad Binding, May 26, 2008
By 
This review is from: Color as Field: American Painting, 1950-1975 (American Federation of Arts) (Hardcover)
-very good essay, decent reproductions, good selection of Color Field paintings, BUT, the binding is bad. The inner hinge is very poorly designed: thin glossy paper glued to boards over rough cloth tape, which is very visible and ugly. This is one that would be better in paperback.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Color as Field: American Painting, 1950-1975 (American Federation of Arts)
$45.00 $29.70
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist