I realize I've been talking a bit about how crazy busy I've been trying to finish my dissertation but I haven't mentioned much else about it. So in case you're wondering, here's a very brief spiel (so boiled down it might not make much sense ...):
My work focuses on the re-writing/(re)membering of African American artist Norman Lewis into the mainstream accounts of Abstract Expressionism. Scholarship on Lewis has been limited because art historians have struggled to fit his art into a particular genre. His paintings were considered not “white” enough to be part of the Abstract Expressionist canon and often lacked “black” enough subject matter to be a considered a significant part of Black art. The task to “(re)member” is thus twofold: the first is to establish the significance of Norman Lewis by arguing that his contribution to both the history of African American art and Abstract Expressionism earned him a rightful spot amongst the popularly canonized artists (to re-member the canon); the second is to present the consequences Lewis’ inclusion have on future studies of Abstract Expressionism and the history of African American art (to remember a different history).
Bored yet?
Well, here are five of Lewis' work for you to admire instead ...
 |
| Phantasy II, 1946 |
 |
| Ring Around the Rosie, 1948 |
 |
| Untitled, 1957 |
 |
| New Moon, 1959 |
 |
| Green Envy, 1975 |
I am not bored at all! I am just wondering if anyone takes into account that some people (like me) appreciate art, but have NO idea what method was used or what genre it will be classified in. I love what I love and I buy what I love (and can afford). I am just wondering why awesomeness needs to be further classified. . . (Oh, I have a big problem with labels though! lol!) :-)
ReplyDeletethank you for leaving such a thoughtful comment! i understand the loathe of labels; i tend to feel the same way. but this dissertation is more or less a recovery project to return/reclaim Lewis his place in an otherwise white-dominated history of art!
ReplyDelete