Eva Hesse, No title, 1956, Oil on canvas, 40 x 34 inchess, © The Estate of Eva Hesse. Hauser & Wirth Zürich London.
I had grand review plans for Andrea Rosen’s exhibition Willem de Kooning, Lucio Fontana, and Eva Hesse, but continually put it off on account of the fact that I haven’t devoted my entire life to studying the work of these artists. Would I be able to write something substantial on this exhibition without having read countless books on their work? I’ve decided I don’t care. I left Andrea Rosen gallery twice this month wondering if Eva Hesse is underrated, and even if the answer to that question is no, the fact that the show inspired such a thought seems significant enough to at least warrant the mention.
Having never seen Hesse’s paintings, the aforementioned thought occurred while looking at a gorgeous green and coral abstract work on canvas [pictured above]. Hesse clearly spent a good amount of time looking at Arshile Gorky, her own work distinguished by a more liberal application of paint, and of course, a uniquely fine wrist.1. Her paintings are nothing short of incredible — certainly they rival those of de Kooning — which is why I wondered if she might not have achieved enough recognition for her work.
Of course, the point of this exhibition is to draw attention to the lesser known work of these major artists. A number of beautiful small figurative de Kooning watercolors are on display as well as multiple Fontana sculptures which seem like renderings of abstract expressionist paint in three dimensions. Meanwhile, the themes underscored are a little more familiar. Undoubtedly a connection drawn by the gallery’s curators, each of the artists allude to the idea transcendence; a white crucifix shaped Fontana sculpture with gold flecks provides a particularly strong example, Christ’s life, death and rising as powerful as the metal flowing through the figure, while de Koonings glowing yellow figures seem to emanate life. Similarly a yellow ochre painting by Eva Hesse clearly depicting a crucifix reveals a connection to the sculptures of Fontana.
From a commercial stand point, the exhibition can be viewed as an attempt by the gallery develop a market for lesser known work, an aspect of the art business that’s only interesting when a compelling argument has been made. Given the quality of painting and sculpture in Andrea Rosen’s Hesse, De Kooning, and Fontana show, I can hardly imagine building a stronger case.
- A visiting artist whose name I no longer remember told me Alice Neel had used the term “good wrist” to describe a painter whose brushstrokes look appealing [↩]
{ 26 comments }
she’s amazing, only lacking an over the top celebrity produced biopic to bring her to mass stardom a la Frida.
she’s amazing, only lacking an over the top celebrity produced biopic to bring her to mass stardom a la Frida.
definitely not underrated in terms of painting. Her sculpture was terribly original and groundbreaking. However as this painting illustrates, the painting was not nearly on the same level. This work displays talent, but is clearly student level. For the year 1962, this can maybe pass as 2nd rate joan mitchell, or third rate gorky or dekooning. Particularly unoriginal is the rather moribund attentuation of abstract forms, whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole. I’d say the power in this piece lies in its tonality, which is skillful, but not enough to call for a reconsideration of her art-historical importance.
definitely not underrated in terms of painting. Her sculpture was terribly original and groundbreaking. However as this painting illustrates, the painting was not nearly on the same level. This work displays talent, but is clearly student level. For the year 1962, this can maybe pass as 2nd rate joan mitchell, or third rate gorky or dekooning. Particularly unoriginal is the rather moribund attentuation of abstract forms, whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole. I’d say the power in this piece lies in its tonality, which is skillful, but not enough to call for a reconsideration of her art-historical importance.
Hesse’s paintings might be underrated in the sense that they are seen by history as a step on the way to her “true” achievement: post-minimal feminizing of abstract sculpture by softening forms, use of fragile materials, emphasizing environment over object, etc.
She is not an underrated artist, having received several posthumous museum shows and much critical ink. I think the sculpture is the best work but she did some credible Ab Ex-style paintings–sounds like the Rosen show has a few of those.
“Good wrist” is a fairly common term for paint-handling (or at least it was when paint was more commonly handled well)–I don’t think it’s Neel’s exclusive coinage.
Hesse’s paintings might be underrated in the sense that they are seen by history as a step on the way to her “true” achievement: post-minimal feminizing of abstract sculpture by softening forms, use of fragile materials, emphasizing environment over object, etc.
She is not an underrated artist, having received several posthumous museum shows and much critical ink. I think the sculpture is the best work but she did some credible Ab Ex-style paintings–sounds like the Rosen show has a few of those.
“Good wrist” is a fairly common term for paint-handling (or at least it was when paint was more commonly handled well)–I don’t think it’s Neel’s exclusive coinage.
Student level? She was young yes — she had been out of grad school for 3 years — but that label does not reflect the work in the show in any way shape or form. Have you seen the work in person? Moribund attentuation/deathly viral abstraction in a state of decomposition doesn’t describe the look of this work in my opinion. It looks figurative, organic look to these works, but paint in this work is built, rather than something decomposing or falling apart. There is a lot more to this work than just tonality.
Student level? She was young yes — she had been out of grad school for 3 years — but that label does not reflect the work in the show in any way shape or form. Have you seen the work in person? Moribund attentuation/deathly viral abstraction in a state of decomposition doesn’t describe the look of this work in my opinion. It looks figurative, organic look to these works, but paint in this work is built, rather than something decomposing or falling apart. There is a lot more to this work than just tonality.
Yeah, given the number of accolades she has received for her sculpture I’m inclined to agree that she’s probably an underrated painter as opposed to an underrated artist. Prior to this show I wasn’t aware she had made paintings — at least any worth discussing.
I never hear the term “good wrist” used any more, so it seemed like some explanation for what it meant might be useful. I wonder who actually coined it.
Yeah, given the number of accolades she has received for her sculpture I’m inclined to agree that she’s probably an underrated painter as opposed to an underrated artist. Prior to this show I wasn’t aware she had made paintings — at least any worth discussing.
I never hear the term “good wrist” used any more, so it seemed like some explanation for what it meant might be useful. I wonder who actually coined it.
“the rather moribund attentuation [sic] of abstract forms, whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole”
Yes, what does that mean? Aren’t abstract forms attenuated by definition?
Also, what does “tonality” mean in this context? The shifts of dark to light within a single color (green)? What about all the other colors in the image?
It’s fun to critique jpegs.
“the rather moribund attentuation [sic] of abstract forms, whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole”
Yes, what does that mean? Aren’t abstract forms attenuated by definition?
Also, what does “tonality” mean in this context? The shifts of dark to light within a single color (green)? What about all the other colors in the image?
It’s fun to critique jpegs.
left out a [sic]: “whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole”
left out a [sic]: “whose state of decomposition do not really serve to enhance the whole”
Phew. What a whack comment Stever.
I’m wondering if you guys messed up on the dimensions. It certainly doesn’t look square to me in that picture.
Phew. What a whack comment Stever.
I’m wondering if you guys messed up on the dimensions. It certainly doesn’t look square to me in that picture.
Thanks for that heads up. It was the wrong caption, so the date was also wrong. This piece was executed in 1956, which technically makes this her student work.
Thanks for that heads up. It was the wrong caption, so the date was also wrong. This piece was executed in 1956, which technically makes this her student work.
I think what you’re noticing is not so much that her painting is “underrated” as it is irrelevant to the art-historical space Hesse occupies. She’s an important figure for her relationship to Minimalism and her adaptation of Judd’s idea of “specific objects” to more intuitive, even emotive work. Her paintings don’t really add anything to this narrative, and it doesn’t seem especially interesting to use them to complicate her practice.
Unlike someone like John McCracken, whose underrepresented “Tantric” paintings meaningfully change the terms of his practice, these paintings don’t show us for the first time that Hesse was interested in form and color. We already know that from her sculptures and installations.
I’m not ready to evaluate the paintings in terms of inherent worth like Steve is, but I think it’s fair to say that many of the most important aspects of Hesse’s ouvre aren’t meaningfully heightened or complicated by her early paintings. And I also think it’s worth noting that this is a commercially driven effort, rather than an initiative by the estate to publicize work that was important to the artist even later. It’s hard to know how Hesse felt about these.
I think what you’re noticing is not so much that her painting is “underrated” as it is irrelevant to the art-historical space Hesse occupies. She’s an important figure for her relationship to Minimalism and her adaptation of Judd’s idea of “specific objects” to more intuitive, even emotive work. Her paintings don’t really add anything to this narrative, and it doesn’t seem especially interesting to use them to complicate her practice.
Unlike someone like John McCracken, whose underrepresented “Tantric” paintings meaningfully change the terms of his practice, these paintings don’t show us for the first time that Hesse was interested in form and color. We already know that from her sculptures and installations.
I’m not ready to evaluate the paintings in terms of inherent worth like Steve is, but I think it’s fair to say that many of the most important aspects of Hesse’s ouvre aren’t meaningfully heightened or complicated by her early paintings. And I also think it’s worth noting that this is a commercially driven effort, rather than an initiative by the estate to publicize work that was important to the artist even later. It’s hard to know how Hesse felt about these.
i am confused by steve’s mention of joan mitchell, whose work seems to me, to be about white space, or the use of blankness to accentuate mark making, while this has no blankness what so ever.
i am confused by steve’s mention of joan mitchell, whose work seems to me, to be about white space, or the use of blankness to accentuate mark making, while this has no blankness what so ever.
She’s awful.
She’s awful.
i have recently obtained a early oil painting that is said to be eva hesse it is signed e. hesse and has a fingerprint on the side of the canvas it resembles greatly evas pastelbluemen have pictures on file if and one has info it would be greatly appreciated
i have recently obtained a early oil painting that is said to be eva hesse it is signed e. hesse and has a fingerprint on the side of the canvas it resembles greatly evas pastelbluemen have pictures on file if and one has info it would be greatly appreciated
Comments on this entry are closed.