Wikipedia

Talk:New York School (art)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by 67.241.180.130 in topic Missing artists
Learn more about this page

Embry

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Norris Embry Norris Embry is listed as a Beat poet. He was an abstract expressionist painter. Rev. H. Carlton Earwiggherd (talk) 14:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

School

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The New York School which represented the New York abstract expressionists of the 1950s was documented through a series of exhibitions commenced with the 9th Street Art Exhibition in 1951 and followed by consecutive exhibitions at the Stable Gallery, NYC: Second Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture, 1953; Third Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture, 1954; Fourth Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture, 1955; Fifth Annual Exhibitions of Painting and Sculpture, 1956 and Sixth New York Artists’ Annual Exhibition, 1957.[1]; [2]; [3]; [4]; [5]; [6]

1957 represented the end of the New York School and the beginning of Pop Art and the following movements. Changing dates in the article without any reference in my opinion is inappropriate. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia. It is free for all to participate in but it is not free to alter without reference.

The “List of New York School artists of the 1950s” was modified with the addition of “and 1960s.” A number of names were added with birthdates of 1945 and 1947. This means that the artists were 13 and 15 years old in 1960. There is no reference as to the justification of their inclusion. Upon deletion they were reverted. The “List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s” should be clarified for the following reason: Comment: I think "New York School" is not completely interchangeable with Abstract Expressionism. Certainly there were non-NY abstract expressionists. I'm not sure the term "New York School" was widely applied to anyone who was not an abstract expressionist. I think a list might be better; I also think we need to clarify the criteria for inclusion, because something like this is useless to the reader if criteria are not clear. - Jmabel | Talk 03:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC) (Salmon1 (talk) 01:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC))Reply


Deletion of duplicate names of artists in the article New York School

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I wonder if you could help me to solve the following problem: One year ago when I started to edit Wikipedia I tried to create a Category: New York School artists. This attempt was deleted. Category: New York School artists. The Category was deleted but the comments requested the list of the New York School artists.

i.e.: Comment: I think "New York School" is not completely interchangeable with Abstract Expressionism. Certainly there were non-NY abstract expressionists. I'm not sure the term "New York School" was widely applied to anyone who was not an abstract expressionist. I think a list might be better; I also think we need to clarify the criteria for inclusion, because something like this is useless to the reader if criteria are not clear. - Jmabel | Talk 03:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC).Reply

In the past I listed the New York School artists of the 1950s. The list changed by the addition of artists who were not New York School artists and the dates of birth showed that some of the newly listed artists in 1950 had to be 3 or 5 years old or 13 and 15 in 1960. When you looked at the biographies of these artists it became clear that they did not belong to the list of New York School artists. (New York School artists are not equivalent to artists from New York City.) Some of the other added artists had nothing to do with this specific group of abstract expressionists. I added new references and reentered the list of artists under the newly referenced title so the readers would find the information through clear criteria. The problem is at hand that now there is the old list which has a number of duplicate entries. I would like to delete the duplicate names for the sake of clarity. I believe that the list:List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s is blocked for editing. Would you be kind enough to let me know how to proceed? Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, (Salmon1 (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC))Reply

There isn't an article List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s. If you click the link, you can start it. Tyrenius (talk) 01:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s is a paragraph in the article New York School which is the present concern.

In the past I listed the New York School artists of the 1950s. The list changed by the addition of artists from the 1960s who were not New York School artists and the dates of birth showed that some of the newly added artists had to be 3 or 5 years old in the 1950s or 13 and 15 in 1960. When you looked at the biographies of these artists it became clear that they did not belong to the list of New York School artists. (New York School artists are not equivalent to artists from New York City.) Some of the other added artists had nothing to do with this specific group of abstract expressionists.

I added new references and a paragraph:==New York School abstract expressionists of the 1950s== following with ==Complete List of Artists' Participation in the New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951-1957==. I reentered the list of artists under the newly referenced title so the readers would find the information through clear criteria.

The problem at hand is that now there is the modified old list: ==List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s== which has a number of duplicate entries. I would like to delete the duplicate names for the sake of clarity. I believe that the list:List of New York School artists of the 1950s and 1960s is blocked for editing. Would you be kind enough to let me know how to proceed? Thank you. (Salmon1 (talk) 01:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC))Reply

I can't see any block on the article. You should be able to edit it. Could you please try to be more succinct in your posts and not repeat the same information. It becomes quite an ordeal to read it. All you had to say was that the list is in the article. Thanks. Tyrenius (talk) 03:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the help. I am able to edit now. I will try to be more succinct. Sincerely, (Salmon1 (talk) 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC))Reply

Lists

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

These long lists would be better as separate pages and are not suitable for embedding in a standard article. If moved, edit summaries need to state clearly what has been done for GFDL purposes. Tyrenius (talk) 11:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I would like to respond to your statement.

1. The article New York School represents an important era in the post-war American art history. The artists' names were listed originally in the article as one list until the list was modified and a new properly referenced list, “==Complete List of Artists' Participation in the New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951-1957==” was required. [7]; [8]; [9]; [10]; [11]; [12]

2. When the names were moved to the new list each edit summary clearly stated what had been done. Please review each move.

3. The representation of artists has been an accepted method in the past for “standard articles” on Contemporary art describing movements or trends. The following examples demonstrate it:

The “==List of artists from the New York art scene of the 1950s and 1960s==” at present includes a number of artists who were part of the New York School scene at the time. The list still requires references for the justification of inclusion in this parallel list. I intend to provide those references.

Vandalism appears in many forms. To prevent it requires strict verifiability of text:

WP:NPOV, WP:V WP:NOR WP:ATT and WP:BLP.

Sincerely, (Salmon1 (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC))Reply

References

  1. ^ 9th Street Art Exhibition,
  2. ^ Second Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  3. ^ Third Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  4. ^ Fourth Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  5. ^ Fifth Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  6. ^ 6th New York Artists' 6th Annual Exhibition.
  7. ^ 9th Street Art Exhibition,
  8. ^ Second Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  9. ^ Third Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  10. ^ Fourth Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  11. ^ Fifth Annual Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture,
  12. ^ New York Artists' 6th Annual Exhibition.


Not really succinct, and mostly nothing to do with the point raised. To sum up your reply: you think the lists should remain in the article, because other articles have lists in them. Whether a list stays in an article or is separated out with a link depends on the length of the list(s). These are somewhat excessive to sit comfortably - thanks no doubt to your good work. Tyrenius (talk) 21:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your immediate response. Those who are interested in the subject will find the encyclopedic presentation most useful. The most difficult and unique contribution in the list of the “==Complete List of Artists' Participation in the New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951-1957==” is that it was derived from the exhibition posters. The list as such only exists in the book New York School Abstract Expressionists Artists Choice by Artists, and now it is easily accessible to all. Sincerely, (Salmon1 (talk) 21:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC))Reply
Having just stumbled across this article, I agree it is rather chaotic, poorly described and poorly referenced. I've no idea why the list of people in New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals is included - there is no explanation of what it is and why this is important to the subject. The non-notable, unreferenced names are counter to the WP:LISTPEOPLE guidance. I've removed some of the non-notables, added wikilinks to a few others (whose article has been written in the last 4 years). But overall, unless an explanation is added to the article, it should probably be removed. Sionk (talk) 18:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Domingo Izquierdo

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This artist does not belong to New York School and should be deleted. Any opinion? (Salmon1 (talk) 01:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC))Reply

Never heard of him, and there is nothing much on google about an artist born in 1931 of that name that I found, although there is a youtube video. He appears to be an artist from Puerto Rico, but not a NY School artist...Modernist (talk) 02:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

moving Jack Roth name

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Jack Roth did not participate in any of the "New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals (1951-1957)." Please see book: New York School Abstract Expressionists Artists Choice by Artists, His name is moved to "New York art scene in the late 1950s and 1960s." (Salmon1 (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC))Reply

Removing material

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Rationale: I don't see how this disorganized listcruft really explains anything about the New York School...it might work better as spinoff list articles, some it might be able to incorporated at NYS, some belongs in other articles...I haven't really thought how yet, but it doesn't work and seems to clutter the article.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Extended content

New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951–1957

edit

The following artists appeared in the New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951–1957.[1]

A

edit

African-American abstract expressionists of the 1950s

edit

For African American artists a barrier to success in the post-War era was the prevailing blight of racism and segregation. This resulted in exclusion of artists of African-American origin from major exhibitions and critical attentions. The best evidence of this is the absence of African-American artists in the New York School Annuals between 1951 and 1957. These annual exhibitions represented a total of 265 New York School artists, none of whom were African-American.[2]

Those artists would include the following:[3][4]

New York art scene in the late 1950s

edit

Marilyn Stokstad, the British art historian, wrote: ’’When the United States emerged from World War II as the most powerful nation in the world, its new stature was soon reflected in the arts. American artists and architects-especially those living in New York City-assumed the leadership in artistic innovation that by the late 1950s had been acknowledged across the Atlantic Ocean, even in Paris. Critics, curators and art historians, trying to follow art’s ‘mainstream,’ now focused on New York as the new center of modernism.’’[5]

The post-World War II era highly benefited some of the artists who were early on recognized by the Art critics of the post World War II era. According to Irving Sandler,[6] ‘’From 1947 to 1951, more than a dozen Abstract Expressionists achieved ‘breakthroughs’ to independent styles.[7] Younger artists who entered their circle in the early fifties-the early wave of the second generation were also acclaimed, but with a few exceptions, their reputation had gone into decline by the end of the fifties.’’ (Sandler verified the arbitrary notion of “generation:” It refers to a group of artists close in age who live in the same neighborhood at the same time, and to a greater or lesser degree, know each other and partake of a similar sensibility, a shared outlook and aesthetic.)

Some of the New York artists having no galleries or means to get ahead took advantage of the GI Bill and left for Europe to later return with acclaim. Among them were Norman Bluhm and Sam Francis. The majority of artists from all across the US arrived in New York City to seek recognition.[8] By the end of the decade the list of artists associated with the New York School had greatly increased. (see: Complete List of Artists' Participation in the New York Painting and Sculpture Annuals, 1951–1957)

A list of artists associated with the New York art scene of the 1950s and not included in the New York Annuals would include the following:[9][10]

New York art scene in the late 1950s and 1960s

edit

1957 represented the beginning of Pop Art and the following movements and/or trends. Painters, sculptors and printmakers associated with Abstract expressionism, Action painting, Fluxus, Color field painting, Hard-edge painting, Pop art, Minimal Art, Lyrical Abstraction, and other movements associated with New York City. During the 1950s through the early 1960s the artists often congregated at the Cedar Tavern in Greenwich Village and during the mid-1960s through the early 1970s at Max's Kansas City on Park Avenue South between 17th and 18th Streets.

The list of such artists would include the following:[citation needed]

B

edit
  • Jack Wolfgang Beck (1923-1988)
  • Ron Bladen (1918–1988)
  • Joe Brainard (1942–1994)
  • David Budd (1927–1991)

C

edit

D

edit

E

edit

G

edit

H

edit

J

edit
  • Lenore Jaffee (born 1925)
  • Benjy Jay (born 1986)
  • Buffie Johnson (1912–2006)
  • Ray Johnson (1927–1995)
  • Donald Judd (1928–1994)

K

edit

L

edit

M

edit

N

edit
  • David Novros (born 1941)

O

edit

P

edit

R

edit

S

edit

T

edit

V

edit

W

edit

Z

edit
  1. ^ New York School Abstract Expressionists Artists Choice by Artists,
  2. ^ ‘’New York School Abstract Expressionists Artists Choice by Artists: a complete documentation of the New York painting and sculpture annuals, 1951-1957.’’ ISBN 0-9677994-0-6
  3. ^ ‘’The Search for Freedom: African American abstract paintings’’(New York, Kenkeleba House, 1991.)
  4. ^ ‘’American Abstract Expressionsim of the 1950s An Illustrated Survey; with artists’ statements, artwork and biographies,’’ (New York School Press, 2003) ISBN 0-9677994-1-4
  5. ^ Marilyn Stokstad, Art History, Volume II, Revised edition. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall ©1999.) ISBN 0-13-082872-6, ISBN 978-0-13-082872-9 p.1109
  6. ^ Irving Sandler, The New York School: the painters & sculptors of the fifties,’’ (New York; London : Harper and Row, 1978.) ISBN 0-06-438505-1, ISBN 978-0-06-438505-3 p.ix
  7. ^ Irving Sandler, The triumph of American painting: a history of abstract expressionism, (New York; London : Harper and Row, 1977.) ISBN 0-06-430075-7, ISBN 978-0-06-430075-9
  8. ^ American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s An Illustrated Survey, (New York School Press, 2003.) ISBN 0-9677994-1-4 p.10
  9. ^ The New York School: the painters & sculptors of the fifties, (New York; London : Harper and Row, 1978.) ISBN 0-06-438505-1, ISBN 978-0-06-438505-3 p.ix
  10. ^ American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s An Illustrated Survey, (New York School Press, 2003.) ISBN 0-9677994-1-4

Article title and subject

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'm no great expert in the New York School, but I'm not sure why it has been moved to New York School (art) when it seems to largely comprise of poets. According to online descriptions such as A Brief Guide to the New York School the New York School of poetry was a 1960s phenomenon, actually different thing from the 1950s painters group. so now I'm begining to wonder whether this article is mixing its facts.

Either way, this article largely concentrates on the poets so, in my view, a better title would be something like New York School (poetry group) or New York School of Poets. Anyone else got an opinion? Sionk (talk) 21:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

The term New York School was purportedly invented by the abstract expressionist painter Robert Motherwell to refer to abstract expressionist painting, including the abstract expressionist painting of the 1950's. The Grove Dictionary of Music adds this, however: "[New York School] A loose confederation of painters, sculptors, dancers, composers, poets and critics based in New York from approximately 1947 to 1963. Art historians apply the term to a group of artists, including Jackson Pollock, Willem De Kooning, Franz Kline, Robert Motherwell, Mark Rothko and others, who collectively established the style of American painting known as Abstract Expressionism. Musicologists apply the term to a group of composers, including John Cage, Morton Feldman, Earle Brown, Christian Wolff and David Tudor, who shared many aesthetic values with these artists, and in some cases formed deep friendships and synergies with them." TheScotch (talk) 11:29, 28 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Here's another source from a poetry perspective (The Poetry Foundation): "A group of poets aligned with the New York School of painting in the 1950s and ’60s. A diverse group of writers, the main figures of the New York School are Frank O’Hara, John Ashbery, James Schulyer, Kenneth Koch, and Barbara Guest. Influenced by relationships and collaborations with painters such as Jackson Pollock, Willem de Kooning, Jasper Johns, and Larry Rivers, the New York School poets are known for their urbane wit, interest in visual art, and casual address. A second generation of New York School poets grew up in the 1960s and included Ted Berrigan, Alice Notley, Ron Padgett, and Anne Waldman."
I think there can be little question that the term New York School began with a particular movement in painting and branched out from there to include certain other arts. It didn't branch out nearly as much as this article suggested when I first came upon it, however. TheScotch (talk) 03:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

New York School is not New York

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Editors should bear in mind that not every artist who once lived or worked in New York (a very large and diverse group that would including most famous American artists) can reasonably be called a member of the New York School. That's not what New York School means. TheScotch (talk) 03:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

But the term has been applied to many artists and it's not up to us to decide who belongs. Let the sources determine that. freshacconci talk to me 17:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Robert Atkins, in his book "Artspeak" suggests that "New York School" refers to a distinction with the pre-World War 2 School of Paris. He considers "New York School" to include "Abstract Expressionism" and possibly "Color Field" painting and "Minimalism". Bus stop (talk) 17:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Re: "Let the sources determine that."

You haven't provided any. I have. TheScotch (talk) 00:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on New York School (art). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Reference 29 is wrong, it should be "David Nichols" and "Getting Rid of the Glue" a chapter in "The New York Schools of Music and Visual Arts" (ed. by Steve Johnson), but I do not know how to repair the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.165.54.38 (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

First generation vs second generation artists?

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Should we be distinguishing in this article between visual artists of the Second Generation New York School? I see this is currently missing. Jooojay (talk) 22:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Missing artists

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Mark Rothko Barnett Newman Clifford Still 67.241.180.130 (talk) 20:31, 30 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_York_School_(art)&oldid=1204268047"