MJJG: intertextual link-o-mania - 115 al fine

[Mark Kohut]

It wasn't a polemic. It was the revolution he brought to art. Almost all art movements, literary to the visual thru music do it. No movements that come later "prove him/them wrong". 





Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 15, 2021, at 5:18 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> His polemic was that painting and drawing were dead arts, just like the abstractionists declared figurative art dead.  Subsequent artists have proven them wrong.
> 
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 4:09 PM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> He kept drawing but yes he knew that was an historically dead achievement. 
>> I disagree that it was drenched in cynicism. A deep satirical perspective on his culture often. 
>> Playful celebration of life and aspects of it too. Deep insight into how we are America and it is us overall. 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On Jan 15, 2021, at 4:49 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Warhol’s hand-drawing skills really have next to nothing to do with his subsequent Pop Art.  Yes, he had an eye, but he might as well have had no hands to make his admittedly breakthrough later art.  His megastar next generation Pop Art master, Jeff Koons, never touched the work that made him very rich.  Their real value was social commentary, and as such was drenched in cynicism.  I much prefer the ultra hands-on work of the abstract impressionists that preceded them.
>>> 
>>> David Morris 
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:30 PM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes Warhol was, thanks David, I can't take any more crazy.  NOT TURDS, however we argue.....
>>>> 
>>>> But No, I do not think Pynchon targeted Warhol with that artist in V.: he targeted
>>>> any of the artists such as in The Recognitions who, as Gaddis shows, have hardly had an original brush stroke in their whole career. Who cannot see the origin of what they think is new. 
>>>> 
>>>> Warhol was not nationally famous until 1964. His NYC and beyond fame earlier was for utter originality and genius. The commercial Tiffany's Christmas window
>>>> of one silver shoe suspended against an all-black window box; the variety of his pure drawings---he could draw perfect circles at will and any other shapes. Look up his
>>>> incredible pure pen, pencil or charcoal (I think) drawings of the fifties. 
>>>> 
>>>> I think Pynchon would know this as in the air and, further, would not see a new pop artist as he presents this nobodaddy epigone in V. 
>>>> Pynchon would have liked pop art, I suggest, loved it even, as he does meaningful cartoons and comics....
>>>> 
>>>> From wikipedia on Warhol: 
>>>> He began exhibiting his work during the 1950s. He held exhibitions at the Hugo Gallery[31] and the Bodley Gallery[32] in New York City; in California, his first West Coast gallery exhibition[33][34] was on July 9, 1962, in the Ferus Gallery of Los Angeles with Campbell's Soup Cans. The exhibition marked his West Coast debut of pop art.[35] Andy Warhol's first New York solo pop art exhibition was hosted at Eleanor Ward's Stable Gallery November 6–24, 1962. The exhibit included the works Marilyn Diptych, 100 Soup Cans, 100 Coke Bottles, and 100 Dollar Bills. At the Stable Gallery exhibit, t
>>>> 
>>>> It was during the 1960s that Warhol began to make paintings of iconic American objects such as dollar bills, mushroom clouds, electric chairs, Campbell's Soup Cans, Coca-Cola bottles, celebrities such as Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, Marlon Brando, Troy Donahue, Muhammad Ali, and Elizabeth Taylor, as well as newspaper headlines or photographs of police dogs attacking African-American protesters during the Birmingham campaign in the civil rights movement. During these years, he founded his studio, "The Factory" and gathered about him a wide range of artists, writers, musicians, and underground
>>>> 
>>>> A pivotal event was the 1964 exhibit The American Supermarket, a show held in Paul Bianchini's Upper East Side gallery. "
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Read Danto on warhol; read the great new bio of him by Gopnick. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 1:10 PM David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Clearly Warhol was the target.  I think Pynchon also targets Warhol in V with the painter in the Whole Sick Crew who painted endless varieties of knishes (or was it bagels, I forget).
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:05 AM Thomas Eckhardt <thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>>>>>> I did not mean to insult Andy Warhol, if that is what you are referring 
>>>>>> to. Also, one would of course have to take into account who is talking 
>>>>>> to whom here, and to what purpose.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 15.01.2021 um 16:15 schrieb Mark Kohut:
>>>>>> > HELL NO, IN THUNDER as Melville writes.....
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > C'mon, man....
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:05 AM Thomas Eckhardt 
>>>>>> > <thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de <mailto:thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de>> wrote:
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >     pg. 112 in the Penguin Modern Classics edition:
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >     "1 of these days 1 of our sons, perhaps the son of a Polish immigrant,
>>>>>> >     will emerge from some steel town in Pennsylvania and mount a turd on
>>>>>> >     the
>>>>>> >     wall of a museum and make it stick. . .and when you ask him what it is
>>>>>> >     he will put on his dark glasses and snub you the way you did us."
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >     This is, more or less, Andy Warhol, no?
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >       > 8) pg 135 - _Moby-Dick_
>>>>>> >       > (Musclewhite horrified that a black person dared to interpret it)
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >     pg. 114: An anachronistic reference to C.L.R. James' "Mariners,
>>>>>> >     Renegades and Castaways" (1953), perhaps? Or are there other candidates?
>>>>>> >     --
>>>>>> >     Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>>>>> >     <https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>
>>>>>> > 
>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l