Artists I love – Stuart Davis

INTRODUCTION

I was raised in a family with art on the walls and art history all around me. I studied art and art history all through undergraduate and graduate school. As a result there are many artists whom I have known about and seen their work over many decades.  This is especially true of the work of the early and mid-twentieth century American artists, some that my Grandfather and Grandmother collected. One artist among this group was Stuart Davis. I saw many of his pieces during my studies and some in person. I always liked his work but had never really seen the entire breadth of his accomplishments until I went to the ‘Stuart Davis – In Full Swing’ exhibition at the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville, Arkansas.


What did I find? I found an innovative abstractionist before there was such a thing, an insightful pop artist before pop art existed and, most surprisingly, a musician who whose instrument was paint. Here are a few pieces that illustrate how the thread of these three ideas weave seamlessly together throughout his career.


POP BEFORE POP

Starting in the late 50s and blossoming in the 1960s, pop art became all the rage. It was a communal reaction from many younger artists to the abstract expressionism then prevalent in the art world. The pop artist was intent on engaging with popular culture instead of withdrawing from it.  The 60s were a time of great social upheaval and for many artists trying to be a part of that while painting something that had no visual relationship to it was impossible. So, they took ideas and images from their environment, especially in the area of advertising and mass media (what social media was called before it was social).  They then transformed these images in size, material, intent and location to have the image be more than just a soup can or comic strip or American flag. They became commentary and critique at one level and formal visual statements at another.

They were thought of as wholly original and American in their creative use of the world around them and had much acclaim and fame as a result. Only, it really wasn’t as original as we supposed. Stuart Davis had thought of the idea and painted many canvases exploiting the idea in the late 20s, 30 years before.

Here is a popular mouthwash of the day and a typical print advertisement promoting it.

Davis took the product image and created still lives based on them, using it as a starting point for a formal exploration of shape, color, form etc. and at the same time introducing social commentary about popular culture of the time.

Odol, 1924, Oil in canvas
Odol, 1924, Oil in canvas
Lucky Strike, 1924 – oil on paperboard

As you can see, Davis was exploiting the commercial world around him for artistic and social expression well before the pop artists came around. This is evidence that no matter how original a movement seems to be you can usually find roots and reasons behind its development that show an incremental development from work that has come before.


ABSTRACTION

Once Davis started down the road of using objects from day-to-day life for his subjects he quickly moved beyond mere representation. He did this by adding another element that would gain great traction later in American life and that is abstraction.  This was not a concept he came up with, it had been germinating in Europe for at least a decade or two. Malevich, LIssitzky, Kandinsky and Mondrian were all moving decisively in that direction in the first two decades of the twentieth century.

As a matter of fact, Davis was very attuned to this European movement from the time he attended the famous Armory Show of 1913 in New York City.  While pure abstraction wasn’t highly visible at that show, it was hinted at in many of the works. In subsequent years the European abstract artists work continued to be known about and seen in America on occasion.  But, here is what is interesting. The majority of collectors and artists purposely rejected the European idea of abstraction in favor or what became known as American Regionalism.  In an effort to delineate boundaries between the two continents and forge their own identity, American artists went in the opposite direction, towards a social realism and narrative story telling.

All except Stuart Davis. Instead of reacting against abstraction he decided to investigate it and find it’s expressive value. And so he embarked on a great journey of combining abstraction with visualization of external subject matter in a completely unique way.

Salt Shaker, 1931, oil on canvas
Egg Beater #4, 1928, oil on canvas
Egg Beater, 1928, oil on canvas

Above are just three examples of this idea in action.


VISUAL MUSIC

As much as I like narrative stories, representation and messages in art, the number one thing I must have for me to be satisfied with a piece is compositional harmony. It has to be composed well and be balanced. That isn’t as easy or pat as it sounds. It takes meticulous seeing and it takes a courageous willingness to destroy part or all of an image to make it work right.

One of the most amazing things I discovered as I walked through this exhibition at Crystal Bridges was how much I was taken in by the composition of almost every single piece.  I saw a genius-level use of color, rhythm, pattern and tone to develop the compositional flow.  It was incredibly impressive to me at a root level.

One thing I always tell people when disparage abstract art and wonder why it has any value is for them to think about music. Do they demand lyrics be added to a symphony for it to be worthy of attention?  Do they demand a beautiful Spanish guitar solo be punctuated with a story-teller standing next to the player explaining what each passage is supposed to mean and how it all fits in to a specific story? No, they don’t. Why? Because they know sounds can be beautiful, profound and meaningful without a verbal element to them.

The same is true in Abstract art. It can be seen the same way a symphony or guitar solo is heard. It can have its own visual beauty without having to be a representation of something outside itself.  And Davis was deeply enmeshed in that idea. He was immersed in the world of Jazz in New York and beyond and he worked profoundly hard to bring that jazz sensibility to his visual art.

But it goes beyond just one canvas having jazz rhythms. It’s the whole idea of improvisation that Davis embraces. Just as a Jazz artist plays the same tune each night at the club, but improvises it differently each time, Davis did the same from canvas to canvas. As a matter of fact, much of his later work was variations on a theme he had developed earlier in his career.

Here are a few examples of that improvisation on a theme over the years.

Town Square, 1929, watercolor, gouache, ink, and pencil on paper

Check out the transformation of the scene from the image above to the one below. ‘See’ it as you would listen to music and let your eye travel around the two images the way you would listen to two different parts of a symphony. There is echos and hints of each in each other but they are both completely unique.

Report from Rockport, 1940, oil on canvas

From top left clockwise – Landscape, 1932-35; Shapes of Landscape Space, 1939; Memo, 1956; Tournos, 1954

Let your eyes bring about the different feelings you get by looking at each piece the same way you would let your ears take you to places in your mind while listening to music.


Little Giant Still Life, 1950, oil on canvas
Switchskis-Syntax, 1950, Casein on canvas

Let the colors guide you the way different instruments guide you through a musical composition. The horn brings up something different in you than the violin. Green and black bring up something different from blue and pink.


American Painting, 1932, 1942-1954 – oil on canvas
Tropes De Teens, 1956, oil on canvas

AND MORE

It’s not enough to limit Davis to just 2 or 3 Art Appreciations lessons. The joy isn’t in always categorizing an artist’s work into little bite size pieces. Sometimes you just sit back and not worry about the label, you just enjoy the visual music.

Here are some examples of his work I think is amazing. It gives me pleasure to investigate and discover. And that is always enough for me in art.

Summer Landscape, 1930, oil on canvas
Landscape with Garage Lights, 1932 – oil on canvas
Arboretum By Flashbulb, 1942, oil on canvas
Cliche, 1955, oil on canvas
The Paris Bit, 1959, oil on canvas

CONCLUSION

This is just a small sampling of his work and a micro look at a few of his career phases. I recommend you spend some time reading up on him and looking at more of his work. You won’t be disappointed.  The catalog from the show pictured at the top of this post is an excellent source for artistic and social information about his life and times. It includes a wide array of images, 2 long and interesting essays and an in depth chronology. I highly recommend getting it if you like his work.

Stuart Davis

Commentary © 2018 Marty Coleman | napkindad.com


You can see and read the entire ‘Artists I love’ series here or by going through the list below.

2018

2016

2015

2014

2012/2013

2011/2012

The Dangerous Artist – Artists #1

Unrelatable

Being an artist sets you outside a certain framework of society. Think of it this way. If you were a back-to-nature family living off the land, growing your own veggies, killing your own wild game, making your own clothes, and building your own home and furniture, how connected would you feel to a media that was constantly talking about and advertising processed food, big box stores, beauty products, vacations to all-inclusive resorts, and more? I expect you would feel like none it applies to you. You aren’t who they are talking to, right?

The Needy System

Being an artist can be the same way and here’s why. The social system I just mentioned wants us to need it for entertainment, creativity, purpose. It works hard to integrate (or entrap, depending on your perspective) individuals into that system. It wants dependence because that is how it runs. But artists don’t need that. We don’t have our identity in a job we do, we have it in our own creativity. We don’t have our identity in the system and thus we are not dependent on it. We are a danger to that system’s hegemony.

The Abrasive

Now in most cases the artist isn’t THAT big a danger.  They aren’t creating something that is going to threaten or destroy the system, they are just a grain of sand in the lotion. And, just as sometimes lotion manufacturers like some sort of mild abrasive in their lotion to clean or refresh the skin better, the system likes these artists because they give the illusion of freedom. They are free to do what they want and that means so are you.  But the system knows that while technically you are free, you aren’t going to exploit that freedom to do anything radical.

Danger

What happens when artists really do something radical?  They are attacked, minimized and ostracized. Their creations are publicized as dangerous or evil or ugly. It is the product of a disturbed mind or a dangerous philosophy or a perverted morality. It is not to be trusted. To show interest in it casts the viewer in an ugly light.

A great example of course is music. in the 20th century we have plenty of examples. Elvis was dangerous. The Rolling Stones were dangerous. ‘Negro music’ was dangerous. Go back even farther and, hard as it is to believe, the Waltz was dangerous.

The Beautiful Effort

And underneath it all, why is art dangerous? Because it gives sight and sound to pain, longing, need, wonder, love, hate and more, and turns it into beauty. I don’t mean everyone will see it as beautiful, even those not entrapped in the system. What I mean is the artistic impulse and the artistic process is beautiful. Not because the end result will always look beautiful but because the effort is a beautiful and noble effort to understand all those things at the deepest level.

And that is dangerous.


Drawing and commentary © Marty Coleman | napkindad.com

“What marks the artist is their power to shape the material of pain we all share.” –  Lionel Trilling, 1905-1975, American Essayist and Teacher