american - habatat · known as the risd whiz kids. the risd whiz kids, under the tutelage of dale...
Post on 07-Aug-2020
10 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
P R E V I E W S O F W O R K S F O R S A L E AT U P C O M I N G S H O W S C O A S T T O C O A S T • G L A S S A R T S P E C I A L S E C T I O N A P R I L 2 0 1 4 I S S U E 1 0 2
A M E R I C A N
C O L L E C T O R
Cover AAC102.indd 1Cover AAC102.indd 1 3/10/14 3:07 PM3/10/14 3:07 PM
174 www.AmericanArtCollector.com
1
Dale Chihuly, Summer Sun, 2010, 15 x 14 x 14’. Desert Botanical
Garden, Phoenix, installed 2013. Photo by Scott M. Leen.
GLASS ROOTSF E R D I N A N D H A M P S O N T R A C E S
T H E H I S T O R Y O F C O L L E C T I N G
G L A S S A R T I N A M E R I C A T O
I T S R O O T S I N T H E E A R LY 1 9 8 0 S .
The 1980s began with a small, but enthusiastic, group of
collectors, and generally centered on galleries that off ered
Studio Glass. The people who collected came from a wide range
of backgrounds, including teachers, accountants, attorneys, and
doctors among other professions. Prices ranged from $500 to a few thousand
dollars. In a 1977 exhibition of Harvey Littleton sculptures at Habatat
Galleries, prices ranged from $600 to $1,800. By 2000, his work fetched
$25,000 to $60,000. In 1983, Habatat Galleries had an exhibition of the work
of Czech artists Stanislav Libensky and Jaroslava Brychtova, where the
prices ranged between $1,200 and $6,000. Twenty years later, these works
would command up to thirty times as much. This type of escalation is
not that uncommon with the noted artists working with glass, and is a just
reward for those early collectors that acquired objects of glass for their
beauty and enjoyment with little concern for economic gain. Jean and
Hilbert Sosin from Michigan, Bruce and Judy Bendoff from Illinois, Jerry
and Simona Chazen of New York, and Dudley and Lisa Anderson of North
Carolina, were some of the couples who enjoyed the mutual experience of
this new and exciting art material. Although some of the early collectors
could not keep up with the escalating prices, those who could developed
historic collections that eventually spanned decades.
Glass Intro.indd 174Glass Intro.indd 174 3/10/14 11:20 AM3/10/14 11:20 AM
175
Glass Intro.indd 175Glass Intro.indd 175 3/10/14 11:20 AM3/10/14 11:20 AM
176 www.AmericanArtCollector.com
Accompanying them, a new type of art
collector emerged. These were people who
were economically capable of collecting
almost anything, but chose to focus on
Studio Glass. By the mid-1980s, collectors,
like noted San Francisco businessman
George Saxe and his wife Dorothy, were
extremely important, not just for the
economic impact they had, but for their
understanding of what were the optimum
conditions for the market of studio glass.
Prior to this decade many artists would sell
out of their studios to collectors, resenting
the idea of paying a commission to a middle
man. The Saxes realized that a strong gallery
system was essential and always asked the
artist which gallery would invoice them for
the sale. Later they helped many museums,
including the Toledo Museum of Art and
the de Young Museum of San Francisco,
by donating key works to their developing
collections. Ben and Natalie Heineman from
Chicago also had a signifi cant impact. Mr.
Heineman was a legendary businessman
and his interest brought other important
businessmen to collecting Studio Glass,
and at the same time gave a whole new
group of collectors a confidence in the
medium. His book Contemporary Glass
– A Private Collection, 1988, is one of the
early publications on Studio Glass. In 2009,
the Heinemans donated their extensive
collection to the Corning Museum of
Glass, which, in itself, generated another
signifi cant publication. As demand for the
artists’ works grew and prices began to
increase, allowing the artists to build more
sophisticated studios and spend more time
and energy developing each sculpture. This,
in turn, caused prices to increase even more.
With revenues moving beyond “the survivor
level,” galleries spent more money on
catalogues and magazine advertisements.
Museums that did not specialize in glass
became interested in producing or hosting
exhibitions to appease curators and a public
that had now been exposed and craved to
see more.
No other artist capitalized more on
the growing interest in glass than Dale
Chihuly. By 1980, he was becoming a well-
known artist, just like many others. By the
end of the 1980s, there was Dale Chihuly,
on the one hand, and the rest of the artists
2
Marvin Lipofsky, Lauscha Group
1997 #4, blown glass, 11 x 21 x 16"
3
Glass Intro.indd 176Glass Intro.indd 176 3/10/14 11:20 AM3/10/14 11:20 AM
177G
LA
SS
AR
T
on the other. He was a master conductor,
orchestrating teams of artists to create
his seemingly endless ideas. He saw
beyond national boundaries, making the
world a receptacle for his art. His prolifi c
abilities working with glass enabled
him to exhibit in multiple galleries and
museums while participating in countless
group shows as well. Even in his more
economically humble days, he understood
the importance of marketing. He told a
group of artists who were complaining
about the cost of photography, that
one can never spend too much on
photographic images. He hired the best
photographers and spent many times
more money than other artists—but it was
all worth it. When a magazine needed a
photo for research or advertising, the
very best galleries could off er was one
of Chihuly’s. His understanding of the
market was important to his career, but
his ability to exploit the properties of
glass was more significant. His work
merged the sensuous qualities of glass
with forms that were the perfect conduit
for the medium. His understanding of
the marriage of light and glass made his
objects glowing visual sensations.
The artists working with glass in the
1980s continued to experience a great
deal of resistance from the fi ne arts world.
One long-awaited article from the fine
arts perspective was published in Art In
America in 1983. The article, “American
Glass, A Requiem” by art critic Robert
Silberman, however, off ered a cold shoulder
and less enthusiasm than those involved in
Studio Glass were anticipating! The eff ect
of this and other rebuff s from the fi ne arts
community was that many insecure artists
tried to force their work to relate to the fi ne
arts, often resulting in sculpture that was
ill-conceived in terms of why it existed. The
most innovative and exciting art is based
on an accumulation of life experiences
that are internalized and translated into a
medium. There was a distinct feeling that
several artists working in glass were not
drawing from this inner source, but were
instead inspired by work that had been
created by other artists in more traditional
and accepted media, like paint, stone,
bronze, or ceramic. If one believes that great
sculpture gives the viewer a new visual
experience, these objects did not qualify as
signifi cant art. This lack of acceptance led
to a consolidation of galleries exclusively
exhibiting glass, and a medium existing
primarily in its own museums and
publications, and with its own art critics.
At the same time, however, it also caused a
re-evaluation of the medium, and ultimately
a freedom for the artists.
One artist who came from a background
of hot glass and successfully made the
transition to the fi ne art world was Howard
Ben Tré. Although he had his start in the
glass world with Hadler Rodriguez Gallery,
New York and Houston, and Habatat
Galleries, Michigan, Howard Ben Tré had
a much larger vision. He once said that
he would rather be the least known artist
in a prestigious fi ne art gallery than the
best known artist in a gallery involved
with glass. His distinguished career has
not only commanded respect by the fi ne
art world, but in some ways led him to
create projects that went beyond nearly
every contemporary sculptor’s dream. He
went from single sculptures to multiple
sculptural environments, culminating
in the design and development of over
twenty-fi ve site specifi c public projects. In
2002, he created seventy-three installations
in the city of Warrington, England, that
transformed the city center and all the
entrances to it. Although his story is
inspiring, few others could fi nd this bridge,
much less navigate their way across.
Howard Ben Tré had been part of the
second generation of artists working with
glass, and, at the Rhode Island School of
Design, became a member of what became
known as the RISD Whiz Kids. The RISD
Whiz Kids, under the tutelage of Dale
Chihuly, director of the RISD sculpture
program (1969-1980), turned out artists
such as Toots Zynsky, Dan Dailey, Bruce
Chow, Steve Weinberg, and Michael
Glancy. The dealers of that era eagerly
anticipated the next graduating program!
Whether Dale Chihuly had the ability to
develop great talent or great talent sought
him out, remains unclear. In retrospect, it
was probably a little of each. He always
3
Shelley Muzylowski Allen at work.
4
Howard Ben Tré, Lightness of
Being #6, cast glass, bronze and
patina, 87½ x 8 x 8"
5
Tomas Hlavicka, FEMINA,
cut, polished, laminated glass,
gold leafi ng, 23¼ x 7½ x 4¾"
4
5
Glass Intro.indd 177Glass Intro.indd 177 3/10/14 11:20 AM3/10/14 11:20 AM
178 www.AmericanArtCollector.com
liked to surround himself with talented
people, whether they were students,
business people, writers, or others who
excel in a particular area. Artists emerged
from a variety of college and university
programs, but not in the concentration that
RISD off ered. By the mid-1980s, multiple
paths would become available for artists
to make a living. Glass as an art medium
gained public recognition and a self-
confi dence that was not so visible earlier
in the decade. The lack of acceptance by
the fi ne arts community was compensated
by a growing interest among sophisticated
and intelligent collectors, critics, museum
curators, and galleries. Artists were inspired
by their peers’ progress and the expanded
importance of artists working with glass
from Europe and Asia, who often seemed
to have a better understanding, or perhaps
a benign lack of interest, in the art versus
craft controversy. This self-confidence,
coupled with a strong education in the arts,
translated into meaningful work that could
address social, political, and narrative
issues. These were the same concepts with
which artists of any medium struggle and
fi nd inspiration. However, not everyone
coming out of these programs became
noted artists. Many chose to work for other
artists, and this highly skilled group would
help accelerate many artists’ careers.
To a large degree, American Studio Glass
began and was perpetuated by artists
from well-educated, middle to upper
middle class, and, in some cases, wealthy,
Caucasian families. In the earlier years
women were a rarity, primarily because
of the physical strength and endurance
required by the medium. Gradually,
however, these unwritten rules and
limitations changed. It became acceptable
for the artist to be the designer, and to
have a support team for some of the
more physically demanding executions.
More and more women became involved
in Studio Glass and, today, women are
creating many of the signifi cant works,
being recognized as one of the fastest
developing demographics in Studio Glass.
The 1990s were the decade of true
recognition for studio glass. There were
more museum exhibitions involving glass
than in the previous thirty years combined.
Museums around the world developed
international exhibitions that included
American artists working with glass.
In 1992, the international glass exhibit,
“Cristalomancia” set the attendance record
at the Tamayo Museum in Mexico City. It
continued on to the Marcos Museum in
Monterrey, Mexico, bringing international
glass to an enthusiastic Mexican audience.
Dale Chihuly continued to dazzle record
crowds with one-man museum exhibits
in fi ve continents and more than a dozen
countries. His chandeliers for “Chihuly over
Venice,” 1996, were created in four countries
and then brought to the backdrop of Venice.
This magnifi cent exposition acted as an
announcement that glass was limitless in
the creative hands. In 1999, Chihuly followed
a decade of astounding presentations with
“Chihuly in the Light of Jerusalem,” at the
Tower of David Museum, which was viewed
by over one million visitors. American
artists working with glass appeared in
international exhibitions in Europe, Japan,
and Taiwan, and additional exhibitions in
Mexico. In Japan, several museums became
active in exhibiting American Studio Glass.
Perhaps most noteworthy was the Hokkaido
Museum of Modern Art, Sapporo, Japan,
which held catalogued international glass
exhibits in 1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994. “The
Glass Skin” (1997-1998), was a travelling
exhibition seen in Japan, Germany, and the
United States, and curated by three museum
curators, one from each of those countries.
The thematic concept of glass as skin
created a new context in which to evaluate
the art form.
Artists emerged that gave the world
a growing respect for this material. No
longer could an artist appear as a new star
based on a new technique alone. Artists
6
7
Glass Intro.indd 178Glass Intro.indd 178 3/10/14 11:20 AM3/10/14 11:20 AM
179G
LA
SS
AR
T
began to emerge because of content, and
not just content in relationship to other
artists working with glass, but content
as the uniqueness of their work related
to other media. Martin Blank developed
his abilities under the tutelage of Dale
Chihuly and proved that he possessed
enormous skill and an active and creative
mind. He has segued eff ortlessly through
several extraordinary bodies of work.
Dan Clayman used his background in
theatrical lighting to create large scale
sculptures that appear minimal until the
viewer becomes involved in the subtle,
but elaborate, surfaces. other artists, such
as Leah Wingfield, Rick Beck, Charles
Miner, Danny Perkins, and Debora Moore,
added a full range of ideas, demonstrating
the versatility of the material. American
artists and craftsman developed skills in
blowing glass that would compete with
the great glasshandlers of Murano, Italy.
Seattle-based artists Rich Royal, Ben
Moore, Bill Morris, and Dante Marioni
became known internationally for their
skill with a blow pipe.
6
Jack Schmidt,
Pepper III, blown,
assembled glass,
steel, 58½ x 15 x 10"
7
Janusz
Walentynowicz,
Ultima, cast glass,
18 x 19 x 19"
8
Brent Kee Young,
Matrix Series:
“Forging Ahead ….
Revere the Past”,
An Anvil, hot
sculpted borosilicate
glass, 29 x 10 x 9"
9
Zora Palova,
Up and Down,
cast glass,
26 x 29½ x 10"
8
9
Glass Intro.indd 179Glass Intro.indd 179 3/10/14 11:21 AM3/10/14 11:21 AM
top related