Went to see 1964 an exhibition of contemporary art made in that year the curator is Siri Enberg whose been at the Walker a long while. Anyway I was excited to see this show because 1964 was a big year for me art school was different after pop art popped. The show had a stillness about it like you find in churches or funeral parlors, Andy Warhol.s grocery boxes still a thrill but Andy left this world in 1987, 22 years ago. 1964 Lyndon Johnson rolled over Barry Goldwater and the Vietnam war escalated , more trainers and Marines. This was an era of conscription young men knew the law .By the following year the war was full blown hell on earth. That was the background of the 1964 era, and racism, 1964 was the year the Civil Rights Act was passed .
The thing with the exhibition was it seemed so dead so old news. And alot of the work hasn't held together very well some of the great ideas weren't so great. Warhol was still a vivid force, he was in many ways the first conceptual artist .As well he seemed to be comfortable hot or cold receptions. He was the artist we wanted most to be. The exhibition has that history feel about it, which in part is it's function as a sort of adjunct history of art lesson. And it captures something of the art of the times but it also looks like things Martin Friedman acquired for Walker which in itself isn't bad but such safe picks. 1964 for not a safe time and I don't think the curator can shape the material that much, it is after all a reflection of past bets. The Warhol boxes are worth a vast sum now, they still have some of their sting. The big Nevelson sculpture seems past it's expiration date. Always up in Friedman's Walker always in storage whilst Kathy Halbreich's was director the Nevelson was always in storage .I liked the outsized Cherry Red Don Judd sculpture, it does burst with flavor, I used to think of Judd was the imageless Warhol more easy fot the intellectuals because it was like the serial Brillo box only minus the camp. And we know how Clem Greenburg hated Camp. Roy Lichtenstein I loved, I loved the giant comics it seemed to open a door I could find my own work behind. He was big as Warhol in the day. Ellsworth Kelly I just don't enjoy I think he was our French style guy maybe, his work is fun but not canon for me - deKooning was the master then even in 1964. And many pop artists were in debt to deKooning his audacity his paintings as forms. Our beautiful Bridget Riley painting - I recall the shock of her optical paintings and how groovy that work was and how big an inflluence!
I guess when you see what you were influenced by 40 years later it does look a bit dated, less diverse, less intellectually challenging. Maybe the past wasn't so perfect? As for Yoko Ono who doesn't like? Yoko but art takes more than the gesture. Truth is the Fluxus piece is very beautiful and it is Yoko before John. But the population of artists is huge these days, then 1964 art especially contemporary experimental art was a tiny number of people. Now the field seems vast and wildly diverse. That maybe the thing in 1964 that the exhibition we recall a much smaller art scene -WAC was one of the only contemporary gallery/museum outside of New York. The art world now is so competitive so huge but still so much passes without notice. Henry Darger for me is the big discovery of recent years for artist like me from Chicago, Darger changes the art history maybe makes Jim Nutt less of a surprise. Was Darger working in 1964? How much that we don't know is still to come. Stay tuned same Frank Channel . 1964 loving art is it's own reward. Contemporary art museums take a chance doing history shows.