American Folk Art of the Twentieth Century

358 Pages·1983·143.572 MB·English

by  Jay Johnson, William C. Ketchum

AMERICAN ART
FOLK
OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
many
"Folk arts are alive. Indeed, in
places and among many groups, they are
growing."
—
Bess Lomax Hawes
Director of the Folk Arts Program
of the National Endowment
for the Arts
John Cross
Figures from America s
Greatest Traveling Side Show
1982
Carved and painted wood;
the figures range in size up to
18" high
Various private collections
Photo by Bill Buckner
AMERICAN ART
FOLK
OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
}q0
To the people who create
Ir
OCT
Published in the United States ofAmerica by
Rizzoli International Publications, Inc.
712 Fifth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10019
© 1983 by Cynthia Parzych Publishing, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced
or transmitted in any form orby any means, electronical or
mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information
storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Johnson, Jay.
American folk art ofthe twentieth century.
Includes bibliographical references.
—
1. Primitivism in art Unit—ed States. 2.—Art,
American. 3. Art, Modern 20th century United States.
I. Ketchum, William C, 1931- . II. title.
N6512.5.P7J6 1983 709'.2'2 [B] 8342934
ISBN 0-8478-0503-4
Created and produced by Cynthia Parzych Publishing, Inc.
64 West 82nd Street, New York, N.Y. 10024
President: Cynthia Parzych
Senior Editor: Jay Hyams
Assistant Editor: Mary Haffner
&
Design: Levavi Levavi
Composition by Dix Type Inc., Syracuse, N.Y.
Printed and bound by Mandarin Offset International, Ltd.,
Hong Kong
iv
Contents
Foreword vii Ralph Fasanella 94
Jesse Aaron 2 "William Fellini 99
R. Adkins 4 The P.everend Howard Finster 102
J.
Sylvia Alberts 6 O. Frost 104
J. J.
Fred K. Alten 10 Carlton Elonzo Garrett 106
Felipe Archuleta 12 Victor Joseph Gatto 108
Eddie Arning 14 Esther Gyory 111
Steve Ashby 17 Morris Hirshfield 115
Joseph P. Aulisio 20 Clementine Hunter 118
Calvin and Ruby Black 22 Lola K. Isroff 120
Dewey Douglas Blocksma 24 Kathy Jakobsen 122
Peter "Charlie" Bochero 27 Theodore Jeremenko 127
Milton Bond 30 S. L. Jones 130
Mary Borkowski 33 Andy Kane 133
Emile Branchard 35 John Kane 136
David Butler 37 Marie Keegan 138
Miles Carpenter 38 Telia Kitchen 142
Bob Carter 40 Gustav Klumpp 145
William Ned Cartledge 42 Olof Krans 148
Bill Chute 44 Rose Labrie 152
Clark Coe 46 Sol Landau 155
The Reverend Richard P. Cooper 48 Tom Langan 159
James Crane 52 Lawrence Lebduska 162
John Cross 54 Abraham Levin 164
Earl Cunningham 58 Harry Lieberman 168
Ray Cusie 62 The Lopez Family 171
Vestie Davis A0A4 Oeorge cdwin Lotnrop 1 1A.
William Dawson 67 Emily Lunde 176
Oscar De Mejo 69 Laura Lynch 179
John William ("Uncle Jack") Dey 72 Justin McCarthy 182
Charlie Dieter 75 Bryan McNutt 185
William Edmondson 77 David George Marshall 188
Antonio Esteves 80 Ralph Middleton 192
Minnie Evans 83 Pamela Miles 195
Gisela Fabian 86 Peter Minchell 198
Barbara Falk 88 Barbara Moment 200
The Reverend Josephus Farmer 92 Sister Gertrude Morgan 203
v
Grandma Moses 206 Mark Sabin 274
Janet Munro 208 Helen Salzberg 277
Virgil Norberg 214 Jack Savitsky 280
James Joseph Nyeste 217 Antoinette Schwob 283
Saturnino Portuondo "Pucho" Odio 218 Mary Shelley 287
Mattie Lou O'Kelley 221 Drossos P. Skyllas 291
Angela Palladino 225 Susan Slyman 296
John Perates 228 Helen Fabri Smagorinsky 300
The Painting Perkinses 231 Fannie Lou Spelce 303
Joseph Pickett 235 Mose Tolliver 306
Elijah Pierce 238 Edgar Tolson 309
Horace Pippin 241 Bill Traylor 313
Susan Powers 244 Inez Nathaniel Walker 316
Janis Price 248 George White 318
Lamont ("Old Ironsides") Pry 252 Philo Levi ("Chief") Willey 320
Manuel Quiles 256 Luster Willis 323
Martin Ramirez 259 Joseph E. Yoakum 325
E. "Popeye" Reed 262 Malcah Zeldis 329
Sandra Rice 265 Larry Zingale 333
Bill Roseman 268 Bibliography 337
Nellie Mae Rowe 271 List of Illustrations 340
vi
Foreword
When I was first asked to write the foreword to this book, I expressed my unabashed enthusiasm
for the project for two reasons. First, the authors are both not only recognized authorities in the
—
field they are also longtime friends. Second, I always enjoy the opportunity of indicating my firm
belief that folk expression, though it has changed with each successive generation from the very
settling ofthis country, continues to be a vital part ofAmerica's artistic life today.
Ever since substantial appreciation for the folk arts began just after World War I, art historians,
museum curators, and collectors have waged incessant battles over what kinds ofobjects can
properly be classified as folk.
Holger Cahill, the pioneering art historian, museum director, and curator, expressed his ideas
through trailblazing exhibitions: American Primitive Pain—ting, presented in 1930 at the Newark
Museum, Newark, New Jersey; American Folk Sculpture The Work ofEighteenth and Nineteenth
Century Craftsmen, exhibited at the same museum in the fall of 1931 and winter of 1932; and
American Folk Art: The Art ofthe Common Man in America 1750-1900, mounted at the Museum of
Modern Art in New York City in 1932.
Cahill viewed folk art as "the unconventional side ofthe American tradition in the fine arts.
... It is a varied art influenced from diverse sources, often frankly derivative, often fresh and
original, and at its best an honest and straightforward expression ofthe story ofAmerican begin-
nings in the arts, and [it] is a chapter ... in the social history of this country." He also considered
folk expressions as "an overflow from the crafts." For him, folk art was "the expression of the
common people, made by them and intended for their use and enjoyment. While the folk art
. . .
tradition has had little to do with the development ofAmerican professional art. Yet the main-
stream ofAmerican art was fed by the crafts during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and early
nineteenth centuries."
It is interesting to note that Cahill served as an advisor to Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, one ofthe
great pioneering collectors. On several occasions he suggested she acquire 20th-century works as
well as those from earlier periods. —
Controversy about modern folk art "primitive" works made by contemporary, self-taught artists
—
accelerated with the publication by the distinguished curator, art historian, and art dealer Sid-
ney Janis in 1942 ofThey Taught Themselves: American Primitive Painters ofthe Twentieth Century.
Conservative collectors felt that many ofthe artists cited by the author painted only for monetary
gain and that their works were not "valid"—folk art. These critics chose to forget that the greatest
—
outpouring offolk expression- portraiture was nearly always created for a fee and that the 18th-
and 19th-century itinerant folk portraitist earned his living from his art.
In part, it is the difficulty ofdetermining what is art that troubles the traditional folk art collec-
tor when he views 20th-century material. With historical perspective on one's side, it is much
easier to look at the 18th- and 19th-century work and develop a consensus about which pieces are
ofsignificance. In the 20th century, one must rely on taste and instincts. At the same time, one
must have a broad knowledge ofthe art world at large in order to place one's opinions about
modern-day folk art in perspective. Decisions are far more difficult, and few, indeed, are brave
enough to speak out with conviction.
As might be expected, not all s—cholars agree. Jean Lipman views folk art as "artistic efforts
confined within time boundaries" which terminate before any ofthe works ofart illustrated in
this book were created. "The signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 also signaled the
beginning ofa new independence for American art. The seeds ofthe native folk tradition, planted
with the founding ofthe American colonies in the 17th century, sprouted and throve all along the
eastern seaboard from the last quarter ofthe 18th century through the first three quarters of the
vii
19th century. Folk art was a prime product ofthe new American democracy, strongly representa-
tive ofthe spirit ofthe country. By the time ofthe Centennial this art had reached its peak; the
machine age marked the start of its decline, despite some reseeding and blossoming through the
late 19th and 20th centuries."
Nina Fletcher Little, one ofthe early scholars in the field, sees folk art existing on many levels
and in many time frames: "Two kinds ofart have flourished side by side in nearly all nations. Very
often their courses have run independently ofeach other. One we call fine art. Created by the
great masters largely for the rich and ruling classes and the church, fine art served the Doges of
Venice and the Kings ofFrance. In America it served the gentry ofthe South and the merchant
princes ofNew England. It was sponsored by the great families ofgreat states. —
"The other category includes American folk art. This is the art ofthe people often anonymous
or forgotten men and women. In the first group we see the glory and majesty ofthe ages. In the
second we discover the character and interests ofa people and the forces that molded their lives.
"American folk art is not an unskilled imitation offine art. This must be stressed for in it lies the
personal flavor offolk art. It lives in its own world and is responsive to its own surroundings. It was
produced by amateurs who worked for their own gratification and the applause oftheir families and
neighbors, and by artisans and craftsmen ofvarying degrees ofskill and artistic sensitivity who
worked for pay.
". . . It is sometimes spoken ofas 'popular art,' but folk art assumes the presence ofan original
&
artist whereas popular art includes products ofthe printing press. Currier Ives, for example,
produced popular art. The phrase 'primitive art' is also used, but this has a wide range ofmeanings.
It is applied to the often highly developed skills ofprehistoric peoples, to the work ofdedicated
amateurs, and to the consciously naive style ofsuch internationally recognized artists as the
Douanier Rousseau. While all American folk art was 'provincial art' in the sense ofbeing remote
from the cultural centers ofEurope, that phrase suggests rural as contrasted with urban origin, and
in this sense is inexact. Folk art flourished in the towns as well as in the country and was not
restricted by geographical limitations."
Herbert W. Hemphill, Jr., is certainly the most adventuresome collector and catalyst in the field
in recent years. His "first" collection contained many works by the well-known, predictable paint-
ers and fine pieces ofsculpture in the traditional sense. Yet, like Cahill, he has always expressed an
enthusiasm for the "unconventional side."
During the last several years, his interest has focused on the modern folk artists, and he has built
an important collection of their works. His book, Twentieth Century American Folk Art and Artists,
written with Julia Weissman, celebrates the best ofmodern-day works. The authors' attempt to
distinguish between the professional artist working deliberately within a folk tradition and the true
20th-century folk artist is interesting: "Not that the untaught artist is totally unaffected by events.
On the contrary, a good many indicate a sharp awareness ofthem. But because such artists are not
concerned with movements, fads, or theories, or the need to make a living from art, there is a
direct communication between mind and hand. They are generally satisfied with whatever style or
technique emerges right at the beginning. It is not the philosophy or meaning ofart per se, but
their own philosophies, the meaning of their own lives relative to their world and our world that
concerns them. The absence of intellectualism allows for a free flow of ideation. The result is often
a closer personal relationship between artist and viewer."
Two other very important collectors, authors, and scholars have caused increased public aware-
ness for the 20th-century works. Michael Hall and Julie Hall both bring artist's eyes to their
collecting. Writing in the catalog to the exhibition American Folk Sculpture, the Personal and the
Eccentric, mounted at the Cranbrook Academy ofArt Galleries, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, Mr.
Hall noted ofthe several 20th-century pieces in the show, ". this exhibition seeks to illustrate
. .
the personal and often eccentric turn ofexpression that the naive 'private vision' can produce.
Each piece must be measured by itselfand yet be seen against a backdrop ofthe whole history of
sculpture. Against this backdrop, many ofthe works in the exhibition stand out as extremely
vigorous in concept, daring in form, and free in execution."
The Halls' vision was once again evident in the daring exhibition Transmitters: The Isolate Artist
in America, created by Elsa S. Weiner at the Philadelphia College ofArt in 1981. The focus was
on those artists whose works fit no mold or accepted category. Presented were 20th-century paint-
viii