et cetera

In the latest issue of the New York Review of Books there is a short poem by Wisława Szymborska with the title “Vermeer”, translated by Stanislaw Baranczak and Clare Cavanagh. The painting that forms the subject of the poem is “The Kitchen Maid”. Here is the painting, and the poem.

Vermeer
So long as that woman from the Rijksmuseum
in painted quiet and concentration
keeps pouring milk day after day
from the pitcher to the bowl
the World hasn’t earned
the world’s end.

(The sense of arrested time in painting reminds me of the Gabriel Josipovici story “A Glass of Water”, which makes a nice counterpoint).

Flipping through the excellent By its Cover¹ I noticed a familar cover design, credited to Alvin Lustig for the New Directions edition of Kafka’s Amerika. However I had never seen this book—instead, I own the Picador paperback of the Bret Easton Ellis collection The Informers (I would swap). A nice design quotation, probably lost on everyone besides book design aficionados and those—like me—who happen to stumble upon it².

There’s a very nice website on Lustig, which at one time was selling prints of this cover, along with some of his other New Directions designs. Unfortunately, they are all sold out…

1. Ned Drew and Paul Sternberger, By its Cover, Princeton Architectural Press, Princeton, 2005. [↩]
2. I am not the first to notice. See http://www.totalcardboard.com/book_cover_gallery.htm. [↩]

Eve Arnold, Marilyn Monroe reading Ulysses, 1955.
From a letter dated 20 July 1993 from Eve Arnold to Richard Brown, quoted in Richard Brown, “Marilyn Monroe Reading Ulysses: Goddess or Postcultural Cyborg?”, in R. B. Kershner (Ed), Joyce and Popular Culture, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, 1996, p. 174.

Monroe is reading the 1934 Random House edition, with the dust jacket removed. This is the edition that was famously set from a pirate version containing numerous errors. This defect notwithstanding, the dust-jacket artwork and typographic design by Ernst Reichl constitute one of the great works in the history of book design.

Unfortunately, Random House seems to be oblivious to this fact—in their 2002 hardcover reprint, they reproduced the artwork and design without crediting Reichl¹.

1. Ned Drew and Paul Sternberger, By its Cover, Princeton Architectural Press, Princeton, 2005, p. 16 [↩]

James Nasmyth and James Carpenter, The Moon: Considered as a Planet, a World, and a Satellite, John Murray, London, 1874, pp. 32–34—

The consequence of too large a solid shell having to accommodate itself to a shrunken body underneath, is that the skin, so to term the outer stratum of solid matter, becomes shrivelled up into alternate ridges and depressions, or wrinkles. In its attempt to crush down and follow the contracting substratum it would have to displace the superabundant or superfluous material of its former larger surface by thrusting it (by the action of tangential force) into undulating ridges [...] A long-kept shrivelled apple affords an apt illustration of this wrinkle theory; another example may be observed in the human face and hand, when age has caused the flesh to shrink and so leave the comparatively unshrinking skin relatively too large as a covering for it [...] Whenever an outer covering has to accommodate and apply itself to an interior body that has become too small for it, wrinkles are inevitably produced. The same action that shrivels the human skin into creases and wrinkles, has also shrivelled certain regions of the igneous crust of the earth. A map of a mountainous part of our globe affords abundant evidence of such a cause having been in action; such maps are pictures of wrinkles.

Nasmyth and Carpenter.
Nasmyth and Carpenter.
Aimé Civiale, Carte des Alpes. Pour servir aux voyages photographiques, d’après ses panoramas photographiques et les Cartes des États-Majors Françoise, Suisse, Italien et Autrichien, J. Rothschild, Paris, 1880; via Jan von Brevern, “Counting on the Unexpected: Aimé Civiale’s Mountain Photography”, in Science in Context, Vol. 22, No. 3, September 2009, pp 409–437.

All the things that in the abstract expressionist days were assumed to justify art’s difficulty—its specialness, its sensitivity, its unrepeatability, its complexity and depth—he [Warhol] was happy to throw away. Being famous and being recognised, he thought, were better.

It’s one thing to have that thought—and the people he hung out with had thoughts like that all the time, because they were stoned or drunk—but what Warhol was good at was showing what that thought might actually look like.

(Matthew Collings, “I am a Genius”, This is Modern Art, Episode 1, Channel 4, 1998).

Andy Warhol, Self-Portrait, 1964.
Thomas Hoepker, Fat man in front of Andy Warhol’s Gold Marilyn, 1994.
Andy Warhol, Skull, 1982.

In 1926, Edward Steichen brought into the United States a sculpture by Constantin Brâncuşi. The customs office declared that it was not a work of art and was therefore subject to import duty. On the advice of Duchamp, Brâncuşi paid the fee and then sued the United States Customs Court to recover his payment. Here is part of the transcript¹.

Brâncuşi was represented by attorneys Charles J. Lane, M. J. Speiser, and Thomas M. Lane. The government was represented by attorneys Charles D. Lawrence, Marcus Higginbotham, and Reuben Wilson. The witnesses for Brâncuşi were the photographer and importer of the work Edward Steichen, the sculptor Jacob Epstein, Forbes Watson, editor of The Arts, Frank Crowninshield, editor of Vanity Fair, William Henry Fox, curator of the Brooklyn Museum of Art, and Henry McBride, art critic for the New York Sun. Brâncuşi himself remained at home in Paris, where Ezra Pound wrote to him: “I was sick to hear a bastard in New York made you pay duty on your sculpture. I could spit in the eye of the skinflint in charge of these matters.”²

Mr. C. J. Lane: Where do you reside Mr. Epstein?

In New York.

What is your profession?

I am a sculptor.

How long have you exercised this profession?

I have been a sculptor for thirty years in New York, Paris and London.

Mr. Epstein, will you tell the court just where you are repre­sented as far as your work is concerned?

I have a piece of sculpture, I am happy to say, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in this city and in London in the Tate Gallery, which is the National Gallery in Britain for modern works. I have a piece in the Manchester Art Gallery, the Glasgow Art Gallery, the Dundee Art Gallery and in Ireland in the National Gallery in Dublin and in the Aberdeen Art Gallery.

Are you represented in Hyde Park as well?

Yes, I have a work in Hyde Park in London.

Mr. Epstein, are you acquainted with one Constantin Brâncuşi?

Yes, I have known Constantin Brâncuşi’s works for the last fifteen years.

I asked you about the man himself.

I knew him fifteen years ago. I met him from time to time in Paris and in London.

Are you acquainted with his work?

Very well acquainted.

Is Constantin Brâncuşi a sculptor?

In my opinion, yes, decidedly so.

Is he so considered in the world of art?

He is considered so in the world of art.

Mr. Higginbotham: I object to the “world of art.”

Justice Young: Limit it to his own knowledge.

Justice Waite: What is his reputation among artists, men who are judged artists. How is he considered as an artist?

He is considered as a very great artist I should say.

Exhibit One: Constantin Brâncuşi, L’Oiseau dans l’espace

Mr. C. J. Lane: Mr. Epstein, will you look at Exhibit One in this case and tell the court whether in your opinion that is a work of art.

In my opinion, it is a work of art.

Cross examination by Mr. Higginbotham: You say you have been working as a sculptor for thirty years? In what schools did you study?

I started at the beginning as a student at the Art Students’ League in this city and from there I went to the national School of Fine Arts and the Academy of Beaux Arts in Paris, where I studied for six months. Leaving there, I went to the School where I studied for about two years.

Did you receive a diploma or certificate from these schools?

I don’t believe diplomas are given in the schools.

Whether you believe it or not, did you receive any?

I know of no such thing as a diploma.

Justice Waite: Did you receive anything in the way of a certificate in writing as an acknowledgement of the work that you have done in these institutions?

I won my way into the Gallery Of Beaux Arts by competition with the entire class, where I had to model a figure so as to get in. I take that as meaning what you wish. You are not admitted unless you show yourself competent in some work.

Mr. Higginbotham: Your business now is what?

My business here, to exhibit a collection of my own works.

Your own works?

Of my own works, yes.

In this city?

Yes, Sir, in this city.

What line of sculpture is it?

I do everything.

When you say everything, do you do human figures?

Yes, sir.

Do you do any painting?

Yes, I have done painting.

Do you make painting your profession?

No, sculpture is my profession.

Do you have anything to do with making sculpture similar to Exhibit One?

Well, all sculptures are different.

I asked you if you made anything like Exhibit One?

I may not have the desire to make it.

I did not ask you that.

Justice Waite: Answer the question. Did you make anything like that exhibit?

No.

In all your thirty years?

No, I have not made anything like that.

Do you consider from the training you have had and based on your experience you had in these different schools and galleries—do you consider that a work of art?

I certainly do.

When you say you consider that a work of art, will you kindly tell me why?

Well, it pleases my sense of beauty, gives me a feeling of pleasure. Made by a sculptor, it has to me a great many elements, but consists in itself as a beautiful object. To me it is a work of art.

So, if we had a brass rail, highly polished, curved in a more or less symmetrical and harmonious circle, it would be a work of art?

It might become a work of art.

Whether it is made by a sculptor or made by a mechanic?

A mechanic cannot make beautiful work.

Do you mean to tell us that Exhibit One, if formed up by a mechanic—that is, a first class mechanic with a file and polishing tools—could not polish that article up?

He can polish it up, but he cannot conceive of the object. That is the whole point. He cannot conceive those particular lines which give it its individual beauty. That is the difference between a mechanic and an artist; he (the mechanic) cannot conceive as an artist.

Justice Waite: If he can conceive, then he would cease to be a mechanic and become an artist?

Would become an artist; that is right.

Mr. Higginbotham: You say you have known Mr. Brâncuşi for a good many years?

For about fifteen years.

You say he is known as a great artist?

He is known as a great artist.

Is he known as a great artist or a great sculptor?

I use both titles; they are synonymous to me. A great artist may be a great sculptor and a great sculptor may be a great artist.

You have seen many pieces of his work?

I have seen probably twenty or thirty pieces.

Were they all similar to the exhibit one here?

No, they are not similar; they are different.

In what way are they different?

Well, they are individual creations, each work must be different.

What do they represent, the ones you saw?

Some represented birds, some human forms, nude forms and anatomical studies even.

So he has made sculptures of human forms?

Yes, decidedly.

When you say some represented a bird, does that (Exhibit One) represent a bird to you?

To me it is a matter of indifference what it represents.

In so far as that piece of sculpture is concerned, in appealing to the aesthetic taste, it does not make any difference what it represents?

Not at all. There are limits.

We will say a certain piece of rock, marble, is taken by a sculptor and simply chipped off at intervals. As long as that chipping off at intervals was done by a sculptor, you would consider it a work of art?

The moment a piece of rock, marble, is begun in the hands of the man, if he is an artist, it can become, from that moment, a work of art.

Mr. Speiser: Mr.Epstein, I ask you if you are familiar with the works of Mr. Brâncuşi?

Yes.

I hand you a publication “The Arts”, dated July 22, 1923, and ask you if you have seen any of Mr. Brâncuşi’s pieces pictured therein as works of art, beginning at page 18 to 29?

I have seen one of these; this one on page 18.

Mr. Lane suggests that you might enlighten the court as to whether you would think that object (Exhibit One) a bird?

I would, of course, start off with that artist’s title, and if the artist called it a bird, I would take it seriously, if I have any respect for the artist whatsoever. It would be my first endeavor to see whether it was like a bird. In this particular piece of sculpture there are the elements of a bird, certain elements.

Mr. Higginbotham: What elements?

If you regard the piece of sculpture in profile, you see there, it is like the breast of a bird, especially on this side.

All breasts of birds are more or less rounded?

Yes.

Any rounded piece of bronze then, in other words, could represent a bird?

That I cannot say.

Justice Waite: Looks more like the keel of a boat, too?

If it were lying down.

And a little like the crescent of a new moon?

Yes.

Mr. Higginbotham: If Mr. Brâncuşi called this a fish, it would be then to you a fish?

If he called it a fish I would call it a fish.

If he called it a tiger, it would change your mind to a tiger?

No.

In your thirty years experience you have met many other sculptors and artists?

Yes, Sir.

You have seen their works?

Yes.

Do any of them do works of this class and character?

There are other artists that do work similar, not absolutely like Brâncuşi, but of that character.

So he stands practically alone and isolated in this particular class of art?

No. He is related to a very ancient form of sculpture; I should say even to the Egyptian. He does not stand absolutely alone. He is related to the fine ancient sculpture like the early Egyptian three thousand years old. If you would like me to bring into court a piece of sculpture, ancient sculpture, which I happen to have, I can illustrate. (Witness leaves the stand to get the sample³.)

Constantin Brâncuşi, Sleeping Muse I, 1909-10, Marble, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Smithsonian Institution.

Giza: G 1171, Faience bird from G 1171 (found in sand): Egyptian Museum, Cairo JE 37733. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

What is that piece you have there?

That is a hawk.

Will you show it to the court so as to illustrate your answer?

This is an ancient Egyptian hawk, three thousand years ago.

Justice Waite: You can see some similarity in form, with what you understand to be a hawk?

An ornithologist might not find it. I see the resemblance to a bird; the feathers are not shown; the feet are not shown.

Justice Waite: The wings and the feet are not shown, still you get the impression it is a hawk?

Yes.

1. Reproduced from “The Case of Constantin Brancusi vs. the United States of America: an extract”, in The Art Newspaper, Vol. 63, October 1996. A full transcript is available as Diane Francesca Rose (Ed), Brancusi vs. United States: The Historic Trial, 1928, Preface by Margit Rowell, Afterword by André Paleologue, Vilo, Paris, 1999. This book was actually originally published in France as Brancusi contre Etats-Unis, translated by Jocelyne de Pass, Adam Biro, Paris, 1995. The original transcript can be found at MoMA; see http://arcade.nyarc.org:80/record=b520131~S8. For a scholarly account of the trial see Thomas L. Hartshorne, “Modernism on Trial: C. Brancusi v. United States (1928)”, Journal of American Studies, Vol. 20, No. 1, April 1986, pp. 93-104. For a journalistic account see Martin Gayford, “When art itself went on trial”, in The Telegraph, 24 January 2004. [↩]
2. Gayford, Ibid. [↩]
3. I have not been able to find any information on the piece of sculpture introduced here [↩]

Someone at Oxford University Press seems to have gone crazy for the work of German photographer Candida Höfer. Three recent covers:

Christel Devuea, Stefan Van der Stigchelb, Serge Brédarta and Jan Theeuwesb, “You do not find your own face faster; you just look at it longer“, in Cognition, Vol. 111, No. 1, April 2009, pp. 114–122.

Abstract
Previous studies investigating the ability of high priority stimuli to grab attention reached contradictory outcomes. The present study used eye tracking to examine the effect of the presence of the self-face among other faces in a visual search task in which the face identity was task-irrelevant. We assessed whether the self-face (1) received prioritized selection (2) caused a difficulty to disengage attention, and (3) whether its status as target or distractor had a differential effect. We included another highly familiar face to control whether possible effects were self-face specific or could be explained by high familiarity. We found that the self-face interfered with the search task. This was not due to a prioritized processing but rather to a difficulty to disengage attention. Crucially, this effect seemed due to the self-face’s familiarity, as similar results were obtained with the other familiar face, and was modulated by the status of the face since it was stronger for targets than for distractors.

Olivier Sidet, Ghost.

The Icelandic Love Corporation.

She’s ten miles of bad road for every hood in town. They say she kissed 2,000 men. She’s a one-mama massacre squad. She’ll put you in traction. She forced an entire lifetime of passion into one lust filled summer. Tonight she will love again and kill again. Her beauty is a dangerous weapon of war. Her passion for art changed the face of history. She’s brown sugar and spice but if you don’t treat her nice she’ll put you on ice. Mistress of the waterfront, she was too much for one town and no town would have her. No man could tame her. She’s a love-starved moon maiden on the prowl blasting Nazis on a bold commando raid and finding love in precious, stolen moments. As a lawyer all she wanted was the truth. As a daughter all she wanted was his innocence. She’s 15. The only adult she admires is Johnny Rotten. She Lives. Don’t move. Don’t breathe. She will find you. Could she kill and kiss and not remember? On the naked stage she has no secrets. When she shimmied, the whole world shook. When she sang, the whole world thrilled. She steals his car and his furniture. But can she steal his heart? She scorched her soul to save an American cavalry officer. Here she is. That eye-filling, gasp-provoking blonde bombshell. The man-by-man story of a lost soul. Every time she says, “I love you” she breaks the law.

From Brian Joseph Davis, “Voice Over”, 2006. Voice Over is a script composed from over 5000 film taglines [PDF], performed by voice over artist Scott Taylor [MP3]. (Taylor is only reading 6 pages. The original edit of the script is 23 pages).

In 1975, Andy Warhol peered into the future and saw . . . Damien Hirst? ‘Business Art is the step that comes after Art,’ Warhol wrote in The Philosophy of Andy Warhol. Not only was it OK for artists to make as much money as possible, but ‘making money is art’ and ‘good business is the best art.’ At the time Warhol was the master of Business Art—he established Andy Warhol Enterprises in 1957, and films, Interview magazine, books and TV programmes were to follow—but his operation was small beer by contemporary standards. Today, artists like Hirst set the bar for ‘good business’. On 15 and 16 September he bypassed his two major dealers (White Cube and Gagosian) and auctioned 223 pieces of new work directly at Sotheby’s. The sale beat its already sky-high estimates by a substantial margin, bringing a total of £111.5 million, ten times the old record for a single-artist auction, set by Picasso with 88 works in 1993. During those same two days Wall Street melted down.

(Hal Foster, “The Medium is the Market“, in The London Review of Books, Vol. 30, No. 19, 9 October 2008, p. 23).

The British funeral-services industry faced a backlog of hundreds of corpses as undertakers, unable to obtain credit, refused to perform burials for the poor until the government guarantees reimbursements.

(Paul Ford, “Weekly Review“, Harper’s, 14 October 2008).

And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.

(Exodus 32:24).

Damien Hirst, The Golden Calf.
(White bullock in formaldehyde, hooves and horns cast in solid 18-carat gold, sold at auction for £10.3 million on 16 September 2008).