Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts

Monday, November 16, 2009

GLOMP GLUKKLE SHLIK SHLORP GHOMP GLUNK GLIK SHTORK.

There is a palpable nostalgia these days, shared by me, for those long-lost Lp covers of yore.  The art of the album cover flourished from the advent of the Lp in the mid-50's and died in the mid-80's, when the rise of the 5" by 5" CD reduced the canvas on which graphic designers plied their craft to a sub-postcard size.  Ever since I spent a sunny afternoon in May 1967 poring over the eye-popping cover for Sgt. Pepper, I have loved looking at album art.

Lately, I've found myself obsessing over old jazz albums.  The best of them capture a long lost era of Cool, and and crackle with the energy and optimism of the era.  The Blue Note covers of the the Fifties and Sixties, for instance, are legendary for their black and white photos and bold, often monochrome graphics.  Here are few examples:







Now, as for the bizarre title of this post. While recently adding some early 50's jazz discs to my collection, I came across three truly weird covers, all for famous jazzmen, all drawn by the same artist, extremely well known for his subsequent work but quite obscure at the time he did these. Let's see if you can guess who he is:


If you guessed Don Martin, your fabulous fortune is prizes is in the mail. That's right, Mad's maddest artist did the cover for a Miles Davis Lp back in 1955. Glorpf!

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

My father is in the Smithsonian

Just stumbled across this. I guess Mom must have given them his papers. They also have an audio interview with him from 1971. No idea who interviewed him. (They also have a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle in the Smithsonian, so I guess there's a little piece of me in there as well.)

His original Cleveland gallery, of which I have virtually no memory:

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Phoning it in.

Great artists such as Saul Steinberg and James Thurber have drawn covers for the New Yorker. This week, the cover was made on an Iphone.



It's all courtesy of an app called Brushes, and the talented fingers of Jorge Colombo.

You can read more about it here.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Penguins

My belated discovery that H.P. Lovecraft has joined the ranks of the immortals in the Penguin Classics series got me thinking about Penguin books in general, and this book in particular:


I've always been fond of a well-designed book (I'm particularly partial to almost any hardbound from Knopf in the 70's, and similarly vintaged Vintage paperbacks), but there is only one publishing company whose total output would be worthy of an in-depth design survey. It's hard to think of any other publisher with as distinctive a line-look as Penguin. They pretty much own the color orange, and a half-dozen or so sans-serif typefaces as well.

I've always been partial to the English Library series, with their orange spines, their Helvetica logotype, and their beautiful cover illustrations (always a piece of art from the era in which the book was written, usually from a picture library called Snark International). Given a choice at the bookstore between a Signet, Bantam or Penguin edition of the same title, I usually reached for the Penguin. If I look over my bookshelf (which basically involves rotating my chair 180 degrees from my desk), I can't help but thinking there's a lot of orange there. (And some black too, for the translated editions.)



The Penguin Design book is a fascinating read if, like me, you're into such things as the Corvenus family of typefaces and horizontal tripartite cover grids, but I was disappointed to find virtually nothing on the English Library series in the entire book. Those beloved orange spines which have graced the shelves of every house I have lived in for the past 38 years -- who designed them? What were the production standards? And what the heck was Snark International, anyway?

Fortunately, I was able to find this terrific article online by Googling (ta-da!) "Snark International." Turns out the Classics look was the work of Germano Facetti, who was Penguin's art director from 1960 through 1972, and who had founded (ta-da!) Snark International a few years before joining Penguin. A touch of nepotism in the constant usage of his former company's product? Maybe. But in odd moments I still reach for an orange spine just for the pleasure of seeing one of those great paintings or sketches from the Snark library. (And often wind up just rereading the whole book.)

A small sampling of Facetti's masterpieces:





Sunday, April 26, 2009

A Little Serra

So between the campus parking and the Festival of Books, we came across a sculpture garden by the UCLA art department. By far the most interesting piece was T.E.U.C.L.A. ("Torqued Ellipse UCLA"),a smaller work by Richard Serra -- and by "small," I mean it was only 18 feet wide and 10 feet tall.


Serra's works frequently deceive the eye and change your perception as you walk around (and inside) them. In the head-on shot above, the piece appears to list to the left, with a straight up-and-down opening in the center. But the photo below shows that in fact the piece is more of an inverted cone, with an extreme curve to the opening.


Audry enters the sculpture. Serra's work is meant to be viewed from all sides -- especially the inside.


Being inside a Serra sculpture is a little disorienting. When we are inside a man-made structure we are used to seeing straight lines, but the walls in a Serra piece are incessantly curving toward and away from you. With no plumb lines to give the eye a vertical reference, the effect can be dizzying.


The soaring curves of these gigantic two-inch thick iron plates manage to be light and heavy at the same time. ( Each plate is fabricated at a ship-building plant.)


Here is a really interesting piece
on Serra's work as seen on Google maps, including this particular sculpture.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Cubism Is Off to War!

During World War I, German naval artillery used rangefinders with a dual-image convergence system: when the two half-images were aligned, the target ship was in proper range of the ship's gun. The Royal Navy struggled to create a method of thwarting the accuracy of these rangefinders, and the solution came from a most unlikely source: British painter Norman Wilkinson who devised a unique form of camouflage which drew upon the principles of modern art -- specifically Cubism, Futurism and Vorticism. Dazzle camouflage, as it came to be known, used bold, eccentric angles and bright colors to fool the German gunners' eyes and make it impossible for them to correctly align the two images in their rangefinders.

That's right: the Royal Navy decided to fight the German naval menace by slathering modern art all over their warships.

Wilkinson's techniques were adopted by the British, U.S., French and Canadian navies, and thousand of Allied ships sailed under dazzle camouflage throughout the war, each with its own unique visual scheme. Dazzle camouflage was created by a battery of abstract artists, including Vorticist Edward Wadsworth.

But it didn't end with WWI. The U.S. navy continued to sail dazzle ships through the second World War as well. So return with us to a time when the dazzle ships ruled the waves, and the Allies had the most utterly awesome-looking navy in the universe.

Dazzle ships under way!


The French warship Gloire:


USS Leviathan, 1918:


No color photos of dazzle ships exist, but we do have artists' renderings of some original designs:


A dazzling WWI aircraft carrier:



Another camouflage design:


HMS Empress of Russia:


Modern art comes full circle: a Futurist painting of dazzle ships in drydock:


Don't you wish we had color photos of these things? The RMS Mauretania:


And lastly, the incredible design on the USS Charles S. Sperry, in 1944. (Be sure to click on it to see a larger version):


Oh, by the way, Dazzle Ships is also the name of a great album by Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark.

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Three Short Pieces About My Father.

So I mentioned my father's last years of senility to Rob Shearman the other day (god, I'm such a pathetic name-dropper), and it started me thinking I'd like to write something about him here.

One.

My dad ran a paint company until the early 1950's when, shortly after the death of both his father and his first wife, he sold the company and determined to devote his life to art. He attempted painting, but wasn't much good at it. His talents lay elsewhere. He had a knack for business and organization, and a vision for the future of art. So he started an art gallery, right on the cutting edge of modernism, displaying abstract expressionists such as Milton Resnick. In a Midwestern industrial town like Cleveland, this sort of thing went over like a lead balloon, and most of his exhibitions were met with derision by the press and the public.

So my dad up and moved the gallery (and us) to New York City in 1961. He quickly moved past "traditional" painting and sculpture (even the non-representational kind he had favored) toward a new type of art that utilized leading-edge technology. As a gadget freak, and someone whose early life was greatly shaped by the industrial revolution, he had a fascination with the nexus of art and science. During the Sixties he presented exhibitions of kinetic art, light art, "op" art, and even the first-ever gallery exhibition of computer-generated (CG) art. In 1968 he presented the first exhibition of video art, called (perhaps a bit snarkily) "TV as a Creative Medium," which ultimately led him to the conclusion that art had outgrown the boundaries of conventional exhibition space. Two years later he closed down the gallery and created Electronic Arts Intermix, a nonprofit organization for the support and distribution of video art. EAI distributes works by artists as diverse as Nam Jun Paik, Ed Emshwiller, and Jean-Luc Goddard.

Two.

My dad was born in 1903, in Ohio, a few weeks before the Wright Brothers' flight at Kitty Hawk in the same state. He remembered the day the Titanic sank (people were out in the streets crying, he said, even in Cleveland). His parents took him to visit Charlie Chaplin's studios, and home movies exist of the family taken there. He spent part of the 1920's living in France, and became enough of an expert to write a book about the restaurants and wines of the south of France. During this time he reputedly had an affair with Josephine Baker, who supposedly broke up with him when she learned he was not actually French.

In the 1930's he spent time in Weimar Germany and saw the effects of the hyperinflation there. He used to tell the story of going to a restaurant in Berlin and, not knowing exactly what to order, handed the waiter a five-dollar bill. This resulted in the staff bringing him mountains of food, more than he could possibly eat. Finally he had to tell them to stop bringing food, but a few minutes later the waiters rolled out another cart of entrees, explaining "They just devalued the mark again!"

He played tennis with the Marx Brothers in Hollywood in the 30's. He lived through the Great War and WWII, and of course Korea and Viet Nam.

He had seen so much. And when, near the end of his life, his mental faculties began to slip away, we in the family were kicking ourselves that we had never gotten a first-hand account of the details of his life (something he himself had done with many artists and intellectuals with his trusty color video recorder a decade earlier). But by then it was too late. My father had taken a left turn into some strange forest of tangled memories, never to return.

Three.

In the last 15 years of his life, my father started taking up causes. The first was the Pritikin diet, which was the first low-fat diet. He met Pritikin and stayed at his institute in 1976, and became convinced that people were poisoning themselves with butter and other fatty foods. He quickly became one of Pritikin's main proselytizers, and would never hesitate to criticize the eating habits of his immediate family if they did not live up to the Pritikin principles.

In 1977 he was extremely disturbed by a book called "The Limits to Growth." This book was a godsend to compulsive worriers, as it used detailed computer models to predict that the planet would run out of oil, food, and just about everything else by the year 2000. The book has undergone two revisions but, like any good End of Days soothsayer, it is still making the same dire predictions, albeit on a slightly altered timetable.

My father worried even more about the proliferation of nuclear arms, a fear that was exacerbated by the Reagan arms buildup of the 1980's. He was in his eighties by then, and he increasingly devoted all his energies to the cause of nuclear disarmament. He made documentaries, joined organizations, and rallied people to aid the movement. He worried endlessly about the possibility of nuclear war. Ironically, a few days after his death, in 1989, the Union of Concerned Scientists turned back the hands of the Doomsday Clock for the first time in 20 years.

I've known other powerful men like my father who in old age become convinced that mankind is hurtling toward destruction and become obsessed with saving the world. Perhaps this is their way of fighting the knowledge that oblivion will soon be upon them. Or perhaps some misguided sense of vanity makes them refuse to believe that the world could possibly survive without them. Whatever the reason, they, like my father, seem desperate to put their mark on this world before they depart it.

My father believed that his work for disarmament was the most important thing he'd ever done. He was quite wrong, of course, and all his worrying about some impending nuclear holocaust was completely futile. In the end, it was his love of art that did the world the most good.