Forwarded by the ARLIS/NA GLIRT Moderator, 2005-2006
Ray Anne Lockard
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Rauschenberg and the Met
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 10:31:53 -0500
From: William Peniston <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
CC: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
Dear Dr. Katz,
Thank you for sending us your thoughts on the omission of gay and
lesbian scholarship on Rauschenberg in the Met's new exhibition. The
issues that you raise are important and I hope that you find an
appropriate venue for your criticism.
The next important show at the Met where gay and lesbian scholarship
will be missing is the Girodet exhibition, organized by the Louvre and
currently at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (I believe). It is
scheduled to open later this year (I believe). In any case, Louis
Godbout from the Archives Gais de Quebec has written a very interesting
piece about this artist and the lack of attention being paid to his
sexuality. I know that he would appreciate feedback on his work and
advice on how best to disseminate his criticism.
To all, I wish you a happy new year and good luck in your work.
Sincerely yours,
William A. Peniston, Ph.D.
Manager of Library and Archives
The Newark Museum
49 Washington Street
Newark, NJ 07102
Office: (973) 596-6625
Fax: (973) 642-0459
Email: [log in to unmask]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 2:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; William Peniston;
[log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
[log in to unmask]
Subject: Rauschenberg and the Met
Hi All,
If you've not yet had a chance to see the Rauschenberg combines show at
the Met, it's gorgeous. Yet it falls in line with previous Met
exhibitions like Eakins and Sargent in once again heavy-handedly erasing
a growing body of scholarship on the import of sexuality to the work.
It is perhaps even more egregious here, given that this period of
Rauschenberg’s work is most explicit in its references to same sex
sexuality, and most self-conscious about these meanings surfacing. (Do
note how often a sub appears surfacing through ice in those painting
most explicit in their range of references.) How the Met can blithely
ignore the words YOUR ASS in large, bold type on the face of a painting
yet freely mount exhibitions on "Picasso's Women," I can't understand
(OK, sadly, I actually do understand). Reviews have tended to nod at the
issue of sexuality, but then point out that it isn't the sole frame for
viewing the work--as if any of us have argued that it is. The issue of
privacy is a red herring, for Rauschenberg has himself discussed his
relationship to Johns in print.
Like some of you, I'll be writing about this, but I'm now writing to
poll any who care to respond as to whether some more activist engagement
is also warranted. If so, what kind of engagement do you think that
should be? Should we finally draw a line in the sand and attempt a
statement against the blackballing of our scholarship? The Met is by no
means the sole purveyor of a carefully controlled art history, nor is
the Rauschenberg show the worst example, but it's happening now and any
activist response would, I suspect, secure attention. How can we
maintain respect for an ailing master while dissenting from all the
attempts to narrow and control the art historical discourse around him?
If we intervene will it be misunderstood? Brokerage houses are now more
progressive about sexuality than art museums. Yet museums are where the
rubber meets the road in terms of our art history reaching a broader
audience--and places like the Met attract hundreds of thousands. Is it
time yet to do something about this sad state of affairs? If not now, when?
Robert Rauschenberg himself will be appearing with Calvin Tomkins and
exhibition curator Nan Rosenthal at the Met February 5th at 2 PM. I am
very eager to hear what they have to say.
My thanks for your time.
Warmly,
Jonathan
--
Ray Anne Lockard,
Bibliographer and Public Services
Frick Fine Arts Library
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
Voice: 412-648-2411
Fax: 412-648-7568
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
"A book should be a ball of light in one's hand."
Exra Pound
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
For information about joining ARLIS/NA see:
http://www.arlisna.org/join.html
Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]
