Robert Rauschenberg, Willem de Kooning, and a bottle of Jack Daniels
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- Robert Rauschenberg describes the story and process behind "Erased de Kooning" (1953), a piece based on a work originally created by artist Willem de Kooning.
"it's not a negation, it's a celebration". De Kooning got it right away and that is why he was a great artist.
A number of years ago (2005?) SFMOMA was kind enough to give me access to the full video interview with Rauschenberg and it's transcript, this is the highlight. I'm glad that they finally released it to the public, I had to sit in a windowless room and sign an oath to view it in full. Thanks to my friend Clare for leading me to this. Why is it important? It speaks to "Ideas as Art," an unrecognized contribution and innovation by Robert Rauschenberg with significance to semeiotic theory.
Omg love the story and the idea for sure what a great artist both.
deKooning was magnificent here, his attitude...that it had to be somethng good, that he would miss.i so understand this & would feel th same way..as though i were not really entering into this whole, if i gave a piece i cared nothng for...& i certainly like R.R.s idea...i came to love deKooning after 1st not liking the work.: should say then, that it was me, not understandng or appreciatng what he was doing...now i love it. i love his magnanimous spirit here with rauschenberg. i would do this!
RIP Bob!
The full account in context is presented in the EXCELLENT book, "Off the Wall: A Portrait of Robert Rauschenberg" by Calvin Tomkins.
De Kooning's side of the story is great as well, and can be found in the bio "de Kooning" by Mark Stevens.
To me, mind you! Franz Kline took abstract expressionism to it's extreme. Opening up for the expanded icons of our culture to be spot on, then blown up, finally to expanded mind blasts, then to an on going sterility. This is pure insightful genius, I must say, dun't you? Yes, dun't!
he specifically said it isn't a negation. i don't think you understand the concept. i am also sad about the lose of the de kooning piece but this is bigger than you're thinking of it. it is not a concrete concept it is the way a backward motion is a foward motion.
sometimes makng soemthing.(art), & the piece isnt workng, it might be yr favorite part that u have to "take away" from the piece, remove it.. hard thing to do sometimes, our attachment to "things", our things....also, remember the times...rauschenberg, johns, etc, coming up AFTER those big guys, deKooning, kline, pollock...etc...so we say, hey no...its THIS now...not negating, as he said, but creating the Next Thing...i dont pay attention to whats now or next anymore..i just do what i do.
Its weird, but I think I understand it.
Gaat om het idee niet om het uiterlijk!
Make it like you're going to miss it if it's gone. That's the take-away. So, faced with Rachenberg's nonsense, De Kooning gave him a drawing "too difficult to erase." Then what's his name, stubbornly and laboriously traces de Kooning's drawing and SELFISHLY erases it for others to see. All this done to feed Rauchenberg's pedantic twisted logic and ill sense of humour while seducing de Kooning with a bottle of whiskey, so he could ultimately bore us with his vacuous viewpoint. Whatever ...
I get the concept and I'm also an artist but this is silly ,to erase a de Kooning piece to make a statement about loss ? I guess it has made for a discussion however trivial . This seems to me Rauschenburg is one of those that needs to collage things for therapy .