Abstract Expressionism

Political controversy over the metaphoric Big Mac

Abstract Expressionism has traditionally attracted a fair bit of political controversy, which is ironic considering it is the most generic of contemporary art styles. It is found in hotel rooms, doctors waiting rooms, high-end galleries, is favoured by politicians in democratic countries and is mass produced in Chinese painting factories to be sold in cheap discount stores. In some ways, the style could be called the Big Mac of the art world because its subjectivity makes it a style that can be used by everyone. Additionally, its closely aligned with American values and has been a staple of the American government's cultural policy.

Aside from the political controversy that has often surrounded it, Abstract Expressionism is noteworthy because it is one of the few styles that are permitted in the individualistic ideology of Post-Modernism. Whereas Post-Modernists would denounce artists who paint in a Cubist, Photorealistic or Post-Impressionist style as lacking individuality, they will make exceptions for Abstract Expressionists. For reasons that can be debated, Abstract Expressionism is accepted by some interest groups as the style for the Post-modernist individual.

American historians have claimed it as an American creation, which is inaccurate. The original idea for complete abstraction from the real came from Russian Kasimir Malevich, who proposed that a painting that removed logic and objective form would have greater emotional intensity. According to the 1915 Malevich manifesto:

"Hence, to the Suprematist, the appropriate means of representation is always the one which gives fullest possible expression to feeling as such and which ignores the familiar appearance of objects.

Objectivity, in itself, is meaningless to him; the concepts of the conscious mind are worthless. Feeling is the determining factor ... and thus art arrives at non objective representation at Suprematism...Everything which determined the objective ideal structure of life and of "art' ideas, concepts, and images all this the artist has cast aside in order to heed pure feeling... Suprematism is the rediscovery of pure art which, in the course of time, had become obscured by the accumulation of "things."

Kasimir Malevich Black Square 1915

Malevich's manifesto found an eager audience in post-Dada Europe where some artists were disillusioned with cultural constructs and wanted a break from tradition. America also became fertile ground after its 1912 Armour Show, which had showed that European Abstraction was more popular with American art buyers than American realism. With their country's pride dented, various interest groups in America took it upon themselves to not only catch up with European abstraction, but also to claim it as America's own. Their ability to do so was added by the rise of National Socialism in Germany and Communism in the Soviet Union. The regimes of both countries saw art as a means to control hearts and minds. They were concerned that art disconnected from reality would stifle this ability. This led to a significant number of abstract artists escaping Europe and migrating to America, where they found a government eager to embrace them.

According to art historian Patricia Anderson, the American Office of Policy Co-Ordination, (which was incorporated into the CIA in 1952) had deliberately set about funding and promoting Abstract Expressionist artists. Specifically, lovers of the visual arts were encouraged to identify abstract art with American values of freedom, originality and spontaneity. Günther Grass, a German novelist, later remarked that

"The CIA had promoted the non-representative school...because of its harmless decorative quality and because the concept of the modern was, and promised to remain so, the property of the West."(quoted in Anderson 2009)

If the CIA was concerned about art being a subversive discipline or about Communists being mixed in with migrant artists, perhaps it would have also been easy for CIA agents to go undercover as Abstract Expressionist artists. Not only could such an agent take note of who the Communists were, they could also be used by the CIA to redefine the political values of the arts.

Out of the American government sponsored promotions came artists such as Mark Rothko and Jackson Pollock. Additionally, American historians started promoting the narrative that Abstract Expressionism was invented in New York in the 1940s.

It is arguable as to whether the American version could indeed be defined as a new style. Most of America's Abstract Expressionists who used geometric forms were very similar to the Suprematism style previously seen in Europe. Admittedly, Pollock was different from Malevich in process and aesthetic; however, Rothko definitely had more in common with Malevich than he did with his American compatriot. Additionally, European abstract artists often created non-geometric works that were very similar in style to those of Jackson Pollock. In short, there was nothing particularly different about the Amerians aside from their desire to nationalise the genre as their own.

Rothko Composition 1958

Rothko's paintings had more similarities with those of Malevich than Pollock. Additionally, he also spoke about the emotional intensity of his paintings in a manner similar to Malevich. In regards to his painting Composition, Rothko said: "when you turned your back to the painting, you would feel that presence the way you feel the sun on your back."

In Australia, Abstract Expressionism was readily embraced by the public art institutions after World War 2. Given that Abstract Expressionism had government backing in America and was being used to asert American values around the world, it is quite likely that the Australian institutions’ enthusiasm to embrace the style was not solely based on an appreciation for the aesthetic.

Although the institutions embraced it, Abstract Expressionism was rejected by the most successful Australian painters of the era as well as the art market. This reached a peak in 1959 when Arthur Boyd, Clifford Pugh, John Perceval, and Charles Blackman formed a group called the Antipodeans, organised an exhibition of their work and released a manifesto stating the importance of the common symbol between artist and audience. Specifically, they wrote:

" The image, the recognisable shape, the meaningful symbol, is the basic unit of [the artist's] language... It is born of past experience and refers back to past experience — and it communicates. It communicates because it has the capacity to refer to experiences that the artist shares with his audience."

Charles Blackman (an Antipodean) - Collins Street 5pm (1955)

There was a degree of irony in the Antipodean’s actions. Many of their members identified themselves as subversives, and had not gone to art schools in the 1940s because they felt the schools were too conservative. As they gained power in the 50s, it seemed that they had become the reactionaries rather than the revolutionaries. The status of revolutionary was further complicated when the Contemporary Art Society refused to allow its gallery to be used for the Antipodean exhibition because it did not support their stance. A clear battle of ideologies were underway with both sides fighting for the tag of "subversives".

It was this battle that probably contributed to the Whitlam government buying Jackson Pollock’s Blue Poles in 1973. Whitlam was both a nationalist and a reformist. By buying Blue Poles, Abstract Expression became closely associated with Whitlam’s political image. This reaffirmed the Abstract Expressionists' desires to be seen as an subversives and freedom loving, while eroding the liability that the style had nothing to do with the Australian experience. As an added bonus, Blue Poles truly was a masterpiece. It allowed some Australians to appreciate the fact that while everyone can make an Abstract Expressionist painting, not everyone can make a good one that shows refinement, uniqueness or holds the viewer's stare. In most galleries, Abstract Expressionist paintings are the easiest to walk past. Blue Poles is not such a painting.

Blue Poles (1952)

The genius of Blue Poles is that within the chaos, there are suggestions of order and structure. This gives it a hypnotic quality as the teased mind is encouraged it to explore further and find the order that doesn't exist.

Post-Whitlam, a story was invented which proposed that the purchase of Blue Poles was heavily criticised by unnamed right-wing conservatives, when in truth, the ideological battle had been between Australia’s leading figurative artists and the art bureaucracy. In many respects, the ideological battle was like a collection of boutique coffee shops protesting about the government funding Starbucks in competition and appointing Starbuck executives to coffee industry bodies around Australia.

As the old saying goes, it is impossible to defeat City Hall. Blue Poles increased in value to an estimated $140 million and Abstract Expressionism continued its gain a favourable audience in Australian art bureaucracies. Today, Abstract Expressionism remains the darling of the Australian art bureaucracy while paintings that reference life continue to dominate the marketplace and public affection. In a a sense, a stalemate has been reached. The government hasn't been able to control hearts and minds, but it has been able to control those who are in a position of influence on public art bodies and art education institutions.

The backing of Abstract Expressionism by governments in western Europe, America and Australia provides an insight into the way the style is used to pursue a cultural agenda. Unlike totalitarian governments, democratic governments can not be seen to be using art to control hearts and minds nor can they be seen to be biased when allocating arts funding or appointing certain people to positions of power in the bureaucracy. The advantage of Abstract Expressionism is that its relative subjectivity is conducive to cronyism. An art bureaucracy can commission an artist to make a collection of colourful shapes and colours on the basis that they have a good social relationship with another art bureaucracy. Likewise, one bureaucracy may be receptive to recommendations from other bureaucracies to commission certain works or to appoint certain Abstract Expressionists to positions of power.  Because it is relatively difficult to judge the skills of the Abstract Expressionist, or question their knowledge, it is relatively more difficult to accuse the government of cronyism. Additionally, the government can “manufacture” an Abstract Expressionist artist if they so desire.  

With Abstract Expressionism being conducive to an arts policy based on motivations other than merit, the bureaucracy can be shaped to be attuned to certain political persuasions, which it asserts in press releases and funding for non-Abstract art forms. For example, a politically minded Abstract Expressionist painter (with no talent) may get onto a funding board and then make decisions on funding a theatre production that has strong political themes.

The Peter Loxton & Associates Pty Ltd (2010) report into the arts in the ACT, the capital of Australia, gave an insight into how the policies of the public art bureaucracy, which favoured Abstract Expressionism, were not consistent with community sentiments. Specifically, the report found that the ACT government’s investment in public art had attracted negative media coverage; particularly concerning an apparent lack of transparency in the process. Additionally, the ACT government’s art agency, artsACT, was seen to be overly process-driven, bureaucratic and unresponsive. Such comments were political speak for saying there was a perception amongst local artists that the bureaucracy was not doing a good job and was perhaps corrupt as well.

Maybe the arts community was wrong in its assessments, but when art is not objective, it is more difficult for the community to have faith that a merit-based process has been followed or that the community's wishes have been considered. Additionally, if the community is showing a preference for art styles other than Abstract Expressionism, and the art bureaucracy continues to commission Abstract Expressionism for public art, then it is easy to be suspicious that the individuals in the bureaucracy are putting their own wants above the wants of the public. (Those wants include building a relationship with another art bureaucracy that could give him or her a job in the future.) Considering that Abstract Expressionism has been around for almost a century and was the official art style of the CIA, it definitely couldn’t be said that the bureaucracy was being innovative or daring.

Blue Poles it is not. An un-noteworthy Abstract Expressionist sculpture in Canberra, outside the Legislative Assembly (the place that local politicians meet.) Politicians in democratic systems love Abstract Expressionist art for two reasons. Firstly, they think it is a safe non-offensive style. Specifically, unlike a sculpture of a nude, they think no one is going to be offended by a collection of colourful shapes. Secondly, abstract sculptures are more difficult to assess that those based on reality. This subjectivity makes cronyism by public art bureaucracies much easier.

References

Peter Loxton & Associates Pty Ltd (June 2010) Review of the Arts in Canberra

Anderson, Patricia (2009) Not Just America Quadrant September 2009