Viewing entries in
New York

Tokens of Culture

Comment

Tokens of Culture

THE NEW CRITERION, December 2024

Tokens of culture

On American medallic art

How did America’s Gilded Age leave its most enduring mark? Through its architecture? Its institutions? By the numbers, the age’s most lasting currency has been its coins and medals. Consider the penny. The sculptor Victor David Brenner designed the Lincoln cent in 1909. Since then, the U.S. Mint has produced nearly five hundred billion pennies featuring Brenner’s obverse design. On August 6, 2012, one such coin minted in 1909, a rare variety featuring Brenner’s initials, touched down on the planet Mars as a passenger on the Curiosity mission. Since the lander used the penny as a calibration target, what is surely mankind’s most remote work of bas-relief sculpture became covered in Martian dust. Closer to home, but equally remote and dust-covered, there is probably a Lincoln cent in the pocket or couch cushion of every American. The New York Times Magazine recently saw fit to publish a cover story slamming the penny’s obsolescence, but no consideration was given to the astonishing success of its design. In the history of the world, no other work of sculpture has been as ubiquitous.

The Lincoln cent is one of the last circulating examples of President Theodore Roosevelt’s direct efforts to extend his era’s aesthetic aspirations to the art of American coinage. Brenner’s penny, with its crisply articulated profile of the sixteenth president, based on an 1864 photograph by Mathew Brady, was the first American coin to depict a historical figure. It replaced James Barton Longacre’s comparatively primitive Indian Head design of 1859—of which the numismatist Cornelius Vermeule (the father of the legal scholar Adrian Vermeule) said, “Great art the coin was not.”

The penny became the most widespread example of the transformation of American numismatics in the early twentieth century. “I think the state of our coinage is artistically of atrocious hideousness,” Roosevelt wrote in 1904 to his treasury secretary, Leslie Mortier Shaw. “Would it be possible, without asking permission of Congress, to employ a man like Saint-Gaudens to give us a coinage that would have some beauty?” A year later, Augustus Saint-Gaudens, the Dublin-born pioneer of the American Beaux-Arts, working with Adolph A. Weinman, designed the medal for Roosevelt’s second inauguration and established a unique working relationship with the president. “I am very, very proud at having Saint-Gaudens connected in any way with my administration,” the president wrote to the cosmopolitan artist Francis D. Millet, who had suggested the commission and was pushing for an overhaul of American coinage. Roosevelt called the medal “the most satisfactory thing imaginable.” Now in his first full term, the president set his sights on the one-cent piece and gold coinage, to which changes could be made with less legislative oversight compared to other denominations. “I suppose I shall be impeached for it in Congress,” he wrote to Saint-Gaudens, who had been running up against the mint’s uninspiring designs for decades, “but I shall regard that as a very cheap payment.”

The U.S. penny aboard NASA’s Curiosity rover in Gale Crater on Mars. Photo: Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), courtesy of NASA.

Roosevelt pitted Saint-Gaudens against Charles E. Barber, the U.S. Mint’s chief engraver, who had designed much of the “atrocious hideousness” then in circulation. Dying of cancer at his studio in Cornish, New Hampshire, Saint-Gaudens completed his Indian Head gold eagle (pulled together from other designs) and his double eagle in 1907, in the last year of his life. With a walking Liberty based on both the Nike of Samothrace and his own William Tecumseh Sherman monument in New York’s Grand Army Plaza on the obverse, and an eagle flying above a radiating sun on the reverse, Saint-Gaudens’s luminous double eagle in particular reflected the luster of its material and became one of the country’s most revered coins. Roosevelt’s beautification of America’s gold coinage not only set a new standard for numismatics. It also reinvigorated the gold standard. The novel design, striding forward, stood in direct opposition to the bimetallism advocated by William Jennings Bryan bearing his populist “cross of gold.”

Sculptors close to Saint-Gaudens, along with others who like him studied and exhibited in Paris, such as Brenner, soon set upon redesigning America’s other coinage: in addition to the Lincoln cent, there was Bela Lyon Pratt with his Indian Head quarter eagle and half eagle in 1908; James Earle Fraser with his Buffalo nickel in 1913; Adolph A. Weinman with his Mercury dime (which in fact depicted a winged Liberty) and walking Liberty half dollar in 1916; Hermon Atkins MacNeil with his standing Liberty quarter dollar that same year; and Anthony de Francisci with his Peace dollar in 1921. The historian Roger W. Burdette covers these developments in Renaissance of American Coinage, his three-volume series on early twentieth-century numismatics. Thayer Tolles writes about the Barber–Saint-Gaudens rivalry in Augustus Saint-Gaudens in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, while Michael F. Moran focuses on the Roosevelt–Saint‐Gaudens collaboration in his book Striking Change.

All of these sculptors applied the lessons of the Beaux-Arts to American coinage, with stylized forms and deep reliefs modeled through classical training. At the same time, but in efforts far less appreciated today, these sculptors also turned their attention to the design of American medals. As larger, non-circulating, non-stackable objects that can be treated more like sculpture, medals can often display even more artistic innovation than coins due to their wider expressive range.

Medallic art, now regarded by some as a division of “exonumia” (for “outside of coins”), has a lineage that goes back to the portrait medals of the Italian Renaissance. Working in Ferrara for the Este court, Antonio di Puccio Pisano, better known as Pisanello, inaugurated the tradition of European medals in the fifteenth century by casting over two dozen of his designs, drawing influence from Roman and Etruscan bas-relief portraiture. Known as medallions in their largest sizes, through their association with currency—as coin-like objects that could be held or worn—such medals were created to reflect the value of those depicted. Through its exhibition and acquisition of the Stephen K. and Janie Woo Scher Collection of portrait medals, New York’s Frick Collection has recently done much to reveal the breadth of European medallic art history while giving these at-times-overlooked objects a renewed evaluation on the level of painting and sculpture.

For many observers, medals have fallen somewhere between fine art and coinage, with the obverse not knowing what to make of the reverse. But medals should please both concerns. Their size, forms, and patinations all contribute to their artistry, while their shape, marks, and serialization still speak to the technical world of coins (usually with much greater rarity than currency). Examples of medallic art can be found in major museum collections alongside the other art and sculpture of their designers. Nevertheless, their exchange still tends to be facilitated by coin dealers (many now working through eBay) and numismatic auction houses such as Stack’s Bowers, which hosts regular sales of medallic exonumia labeled under “numismatic Americana.” The study and conservation of medals has centered around the American Numismatic Society, founded in New York in 1858, while medallic artists have historically been associated with the National Sculpture Society, the National Academy of Design, the National Arts Club, the Grolier Club, and the Century Association.

Society of Medalists issues. Photo courtesy of medallicartcollector.com.

Through its use in commemoration—in impressing tangible monuments into fine metal—a rich medallic tradition speaks to the health of a culture. Medals leave a lasting record of a civilization’s military, athletic, artistic, scholastic, and agricultural achievements. They reflect the values placed on events and figures. They speak to the weight of their depictions through their tangible mass. They also reveal a particular artistry in their deployment of letters, numbers, and symbols as they tell a concise story, usually in two acts, through the flip of their front and back faces—their heads-and-tails designs.

Unlike many other works of art, medals are also intended for personal contemplation. They are meant to be given, held, collected, and privately revered. At the same time, minted in multiples, medals are enduring and accessible to a wider audience. Through their reduction of works of sculpture to portable size, they provide unique access to artistry, with sculptors exploring the objects’ diminutive possibilities. As I sought out a handful of American art medals while laid up with a broken ankle, in their tactile presence, I discovered nothing less than a museum in miniature.

The modern medal presents its miniature world by way of a key French invention: the Janvier Reducing Machine. Patented by the French engraver Victor Janvier in 1899, this pantograph lathe can scan a much larger sculptural prototype and reduce its forms with astonishing accuracy onto a steel die, which is then used to strike a coin or medal. The Janvier machine was not the first pantograph lathe in existence, but its great efficiency and accuracy meant that coin designers and medallic artists could for the first time impose their sculptural vision without the imposition of engravers and diesinkers.

The first Janvier came to America not through the U.S. Mint but rather through a private New York firm that went on to play a central role in twentieth century medal production: the Medallic Art Company, popularly known as MACO. In 1902, an engraver named Henri Weil became familiar with the Janvier machine’s operations while in Paris and imported one for his work with Deitsch Brothers, a ladies’ handbag company, at first to create medallic ornaments for its leather designs. When such ornaments soon fell out of fashion, Weil began promoting his reduction services to sculptors and, along with his brother Felix, spun off operations into a stand-alone company. So crucial was the arrival of this Janvier—and so resistant was Barber as the government’s chief engraver—that Saint-Gaudens’s Benjamin Franklin bicentennial medal, his double-eagle design, and Brenner’s Lincoln cent were all only able to be finalized once they had passed through initial reduction stages with Weil in New York.

The obverse of the James H. Hyde Medallion on the Janvier reduction machine at the Medallic Art Company. Photo courtesy of the American Numismatic Society.

In the nineteenth century, private firms such as Gorham in Providence, Davison’s in Philadelphia, Green Duck in Chicago, Whitehead & Hoag in Newark, and Tiffany in New York were producing a wide selection of commissioned medals. With the Janvier, however, the Weils could appeal directly to sculptors and a growing interest in medallic art for art’s sake. Numismatic societies in Europe were already promoting their own art medals—works created for aesthetic appreciation instead of any particular commemoration, and usually produced through subscription rather than commission. Such organizations included the Art Union of London, the Société hollandaise-belge des Amis de la médaille d’art in Brussels, the Österreichische Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Medaillenkunst und Kleinplastik in Vienna, and the Société des Amis de la médaille française in Paris. By the turn of the century, as these medals were collected and exhibited in the United States, artists and patrons looked to create an American counterpart.

Through his work on the Lincoln cent, Henri Weil befriended the Lincoln collector Robert Hewitt Jr. Together with Charles de Kay, the poet and newspaper editor who helped found several New York cultural institutions, in 1909 Hewitt and Weil launched the short-lived Circle of Friends of the Medallion. With two medals a year, each inserted in the binding of a booklet issued to some five hundred subscribers through 1915, the series alternated between historical and philosophical subjects and involved the work of prominent sculptors including John Flanagan (Hudson–Fulton Celebration, cof 1, 1909), Brenner (Motherhood, cof 4, 1911), and Louis Potter (Abdul Baha, cof 7, 1912). The Ocean (cof 8, 1913), by Sigurd Neandross, is arguably the most striking and strange of the series for its contrast between obverse and reverse: on one side, a top-down image of two figures caught in a maelstrom; on the other, a sea-god with his mouth on the water’s horizon line. In its swirling energy and centripetal force, the design makes the most of the medal’s circular shape.

Due to a financial dispute between Deitsch and the Weils, the edge marks of the Medallic Art Company only appear at the beginning and end of this series, as much of the production for the Friends of the Medallion went to Joseph K. Davison’s Sons in Philadelphia. In 1919, an investor named Clyde Curle Trees entered the MACO partnership and expanded the New York company into a fully fledged private mint that could attract sculptural talent while also producing much of the last century’s run of American medals.

In the late 1920s, Trees commissioned a film featuring the sculptor Laura Gardin Fraser called The Medal Maker. The film depicted Fraser in her New York studio creating the Special Medal of Honor for the National Sculpture Society (her design is used for the award to this day). At a “sculptors dinner” in 1937, MACO first screened this movie for some seventy-five attendees, whom the company squeezed in among the machinery in what was at the time its Manhattan workshop, a small, two-story building at 210 East Fifty-first Street, just east of Third Avenue, which still stands.

The dinner and movie celebrated American medal-making at the height of its achievements. Medallic Art created a bas-relief plaquette with a profile of Saint-Gaudens by John Flanagan as the night’s parting gift for each guest—although a visit by the New York Police Department, on the trail of a murder suspect allegedly “dressed like a sculptor,” left another impression on the diners as they were detained for questioning.

In the 1990s, by then operating out of South Dakota and Nevada, MACO unearthed this film and brought in Elizabeth Jones, the former chief engraver of the U.S. Mint, to add her narration to the silent documentary and the events surrounding its first screening. The American Numismatic Society hosts a remastered version of this documentary on YouTube as one of the assets the society acquired through its purchase of MACO’s extensive archives and intellectual property—the largest acquisition in the organization’s history—following a series of bankruptcies of the 113-year-old company in 2018.

The Medal Maker imparts a special appreciation for the many steps required to bring a medal from inception to completion—a remarkable combination of art, craft, and machinery all working together at the highest levels. In the film, Fraser begins her medal with pencil sketches. She distills the design down to its essential symbols and letterforms: for the obverse, a male nude, representing the master sculptor, forming the hoof of Pegasus with a mallet and chisel; on the reverse, the lettering of the award along with an image of a flame.

To start the process of transforming her drawing into three dimensions, Fraser smooths out a round, ten-inch cake of oil-based plastiline on a shellacked wooden board. (Other metallic sculptors might similarly begin with a concave plaster disk.) Onto this soft cylinder Fraser enlarges and transfers her sketches with dividers by incising the clay with a wooden stylus. She then adds clay pellets and smoothes them over with her fingers, slowly building up the surface relief. In the meantime, posed in front of her worktable, Fraser’s studio assistant does double duty as her live model, here shown wearing leopard-print briefs as he holds a hammer and chisel in a frozen pose.

Once the obverse relief is finished, looking like a much larger version of the front side of her proposed model, Fraser adds letters to her reverse design. While some medalists use molds to create lettering, or in earlier times would have stamped small letters directly onto a die, Fraser instead rolls out thin ropes of clay and shapes her letterforms on the large disk by hand. By tradition, medallic lettering appears uppercase, although this was one of those rules that the sculptor Paul Manship went on to break.

With the clay patterns for the two sides of the medal complete, Fraser’s studio assistant (now wearing clothes) prepares to cast each in plaster. He fashions a thin strip of metal around the clay to form a fence. He then spatulates, or stirs without introducing bubbles, a mixture of plaster and water, which he brushes and pours over the clay. This plaster creates the first negative impression of the design. Since air bubbles are the enemy of an accurate transfer, the assistant blows on the drying plaster to pop them. A vibrating table can also be used to shake air bubbles to the surface.

The plaster warms from the chemical reaction as it dries. Once it has cooled, the assistant lifts the plaster off the clay. Fraser repairs any infidelities in this cast so her assistant can create a second set of plaster patterns, this time as positive impressions of the negative. To keep the wet plaster of this next positive cast from sticking to the negative mold, like buttering a pan, the assistant brushes a thin layer of vegetable oil on the dry plaster surface (in later years, this became a spray of silicone).

Again, once this new positive plaster is dry and separated from its negative pattern, Fraser makes final fixes and adjustments to these impressions. The next step involves transferring the positive plaster patterns back into negative form, but this time into a much more durable material. In the film, Fraser turns to the traditional technique of casting her plasters into metal at New York’s Roman Bronze Works. By the 1930s, for this step, many other medallic artists and mint designers had switched over to using what are known as galvanos. These copper encrustations are formed on the surface of the plasters—which have been soaked in beeswax and dusted with copper—through electrolysis. The process, done on site at the medal press, creates negative impressions of plaster patterns that are accurate down to the molecule.

The shipping & receiving dock of the Medallic Art Company ca. 1947–51. Photo courtesy of the American Numismatic Society.

Whether cast or electroformed, these metal transfers, called die shells, provide the final patterns for the creation of the small medallic dies—the forms that are used to shape the medals under intense pressure. Earlier medals, including Renaissance portrait medals, were usually cast in a foundry. Later on, once machinery could impose the pressures necessary to strike the blank bronze disks called planchets, die presses similar to coinage mints became the standard for medal production.

The final step in getting Fraser’s design into these medal presses is to use her large die shells to serve as the models for the smaller steel dies. For this process, The Medal Maker shows the Janvier Reducing Machine in action. As the die shell slowly rotates on one side of the machine, a tracing point reads the shell like a phonograph record. Attached to this point by a beam, and calibrated to reduce the die-shell forms by a factor adjustable from ten-to-one to three-to-one, a lathe cuts into a rotating steel cylinder called the die blank. As oil is played over the turning steel to remove metal shavings and lubricate the cutting bit, the process gets repeated three times with ever finer tools. Once this engraving is complete, the steel dies are heated, or “annealed,” to harden them.

Only now are Fraser’s designs ready to be struck into medals, as the Janvier reduction process has sculpted her forms in minute detail, allowing for the creation of what will become sculptures in miniature. Planchet disks, the medals’ raw material, are cut from strips of bronze by a four-hundred-ton press and annealed with a blowtorch to soften them (such heating has an opposite effect on bronze compared to iron). The planchets are then placed by a machinist one by one in the thousand-ton press—its gears and belts filling the workshop—where they are struck and annealed over a dozen different times. Through repeated striking and annealing, the bronze reliefs finally take their form on each side of the medal.

Unlike with a smaller and flatter coin, which is usually struck only once and then considered complete, bronze medals go through a variety of finishing stages after repeated striking to create their handcrafted patinas. Following the die press, patineurs blast fine sand over the surfaces of the medals to give them a microscopic roughness. They then expose the medals to chemicals such as ammonium sulfide that react with the bronze in various ways. Bronze medalists have dozens of patinations to choose from, with the surface treatment just as artistically determined as the relief itself. Once the bronze is darkened, the patineur often brushes and brightens the higher surfaces of the relief with a pumice solution to create contrast with the darkened areas and emphasize the three-dimensional forms. A spray of lacquer then locks these handmade finishes in place.

Afinal segment of The Medal Maker features Daniel Chester French receiving Laura Gardin Fraser’s Sculpture Society medal as Adolph A. Weinman, James Earle Fraser (Laura’s husband), Hermon Atkins MacNeil, and Herbert Adams look on. With the exception of French, who died in 1931, just after this film was created, all of these sculptors went on to play significant roles in the Society of Medalists, a follow-up to the Friends of the Medallion and America’s longest running series of art medals, which MACO inaugurated under the advisement of the philanthropist George D. Pratt at the same time this film was made.

With 128 regular issues created over sixty-five years—two a year, each roughly three inches in diameter, available at the start for eight dollars annually by subscription, always (for its first decades, at least) by a different sculptor—the Society of Medalists tested the limits of medallic art while presenting a who’s who of twentieth-century American sculpture. Beginning in 1930 at the height of the Depression, continuing through the Second World War, and running through the full length of the Cold War, only ending in 1995, the series reflected the concerns, manners, and mores of American society in miniature. Obliquely at times, more directly at others, its artists found remarkably varied ways to convey meaning in objects meant for the palm of the hand. The definitive book on both the Friends of the Medallion and the Society of Medalists is American Art Medals, 1909–1995, by David Thomason Alexander.

Paul Manship, Hail to Dionysus, 1930, Bronze, Society of Medalists Issue 2.

The issues quickly revealed how the Society of Medalists looked to exceed the accomplishments of the Friends of the Medallion, in particular through a range of patination. Sculpture is an art form in two dimensions as much as three. While almost all composed in bronze, the society’s medals employed a variety of surface treatments, which could range within a single design and across MACO’s reissues struck at its Danbury plant. At their best these surfaces accentuated the subjects of the compositions: the golden mist of Laura Gardin Fraser’s Hunter–Ruffed Grouse (SOM 1, 1930); the wine-dark red of Paul Manship’s Hail to Dionysus (SOM 2, 1930); the green rustication of Hermon MacNeil’s Hopi Prayer for Rain (SOM 3, 1931). In Aesop’s Fables, by Edmond Amateis (SOM 21, 1940), mirrorlike silver plating reflects the relief of a dog who loses his food while contemplating his own image. Frank Eliscu’s Sea Treasures (SOM 70, 1964) features a green patina and bowl-like design that appear to submerge its depiction of marine life and diver. The experimental nature of the series only expanded in its later years, in particular teasing out the relationship of the medals’ obverse and reverse. Just as the two figures of Robert Ingersoll Aitken’s Omnia Vincit Amor (SOM 15, 1937) appear to embrace through the surface of the medal, Cat and Mouse by Robert A. Weinman (SOM 115, 1987), the son of the Gilded Age sculptor and thirty-ninth society medalist, appear to chase each other around a block of Swiss cheese.

In an article of January 8, 1931, titled “God of Wine Stirs Medalists’ Society,” The New York Times noted how this “society was formed more than a year ago for the promotion of art by distributing small pieces of bas-relief sculpture, to make it possible for the man of small means to have works of art in his home.” Manship was then quoted in comment on the controversy he had caused by choosing Dionysus for his theme at the height of Prohibition: “The medal is not conventional. It is subtly humorous, and is symbolic of a present-day attitude toward certain restraints of the times. Thus it is commemorative of an era.”

Today, as I happily discovered, this Manship medal, as with most of the society’s issues, remains remarkably available for the work of one of the last century’s great sculptors. Turning one over in my hands, appreciating its triumphantly sly design, I could not help but feel like a medalist myself.

Comment

A Lion in Zion

Comment

A Lion in Zion

THE NEW CRITERION, November 2024

A lion in Zion

On “All About Herzl: The Exhibition” at the Temple Emanu-El Bernard Museum of Judaica, New York.

The raid on the town can only be described as an atrocity. Terrorists from across the border descended on the remote village and quickly overran its defenses. Trained and supported by a hostile state, which had planned the attack as part of a larger proxy war, tribal mercenaries went door to door “with horrid shouting and yelling,” according to one eyewitness account, “like a flood upon us.”

Over the course of the day, the attackers brutalized and murdered as many residents as they could find. They bludgeoned and burned the townspeople in their homes. People of all races and backgrounds fell victim to the assault. Anyone the terrorists could not round up to take back across the border as either a hostage or domestic slave was slaughtered. Women and infants, along with the infirm, were specifically targeted.

By the next day, ten men, nine women, and twenty-five children lay dead out of a population of 291, with more than a hundred people taken hostage. Nearly half the town was reduced to ashes as the attackers looted what remained. Even if they survived the initial onslaught, husbands and fathers had to watch as their wives and children were slain for not keeping pace on the forced march back to enemy territory.

Meanwhile, those who survived back home attempted to raise the funds to pay the kidnappers for the return of their kin—often in vain. Negotiations dragged on for years while the participants in the raiding party fought over the booty. Hostages had to renounce their faith as they were forced to live with their attackers. Half the captives never made it home. Eventually, one survivor gave witness to the massacre in a book that galvanized public opinion. Its title was The Redeemed Captive Returning to Zion.

The Deerfield Massacre of February 29, 1704, described above, is a reminder of the brutalities Americans endured in the creation of what became the United States. The attack on a remote village in the Connecticut River Valley by Mohawk Indians and their allies, crossing the border from Canada along with their French enablers, was just one episode in what historians know as Queen Anne’s War (1702–13), part of the greater War of the Spanish Succession.

Nation-building is a difficult business. Often the outsize burden of cultivating a wilderness and taming a border can only be endured through faith. America’s early settlers, persecuted across the Atlantic, found power in their belief in the City upon a Hill, in creating the New Jerusalem that would become their Manifest Destiny. Some three centuries on, a similar faith in a Promised Land, a Zion, inspired Theodor Herzl (1860–1904) to envision what became, just a few decades after his death at age forty-four, the modern State of Israel.

A small but potent exhibition now on view at New York’s Temple Emanu-El Bernard Museum of Judaica called “All About Herzl” delivers on its promise to reveal this latter-day nation-builder through primary documents and the iconography that came to surround him.1 Drawing on the Central Zionist Archives of the World Zionist Organization (here mostly in facsimile) and the David Matlow Collection of (original) Herzl memorabilia, the fascinating exhibition curated by Warren Klein presents the Zionist behind Zion and the cultural artifacts he and others deployed to inspire Israel’s creation.

A delegate card from the First Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897, Collection of David Matlow, Toronto. Photo: Kevin Viner.

The exhibition begins on East Sixty-fifth Street, where a banner for the show depicts Herzl in profile, hands clasped together beneath his Assyrian beard, leaning over a railing and gazing out at the Fifth Avenue façade of Temple Emanu-El and the Brooklyn Bridge. As with much Herzl iconography, this image represents a wishful concatenation. Herzl never visited the United States. The picture is rather a combination of Ephraim Moses Lilien’s 1901 photograph of Herzl overlooking the Rhine from his hotel balcony in Basel, Switzerland, taken as he attended the fifth Zionist Congress, with modern images of New York. For the exhibition-goer, a further opportunity to be seen in Herzl’s shadow continues just inside the lobby. Here visitors can stand beside a life-size statue of Herzl, arms folded, positioned in front of a backdrop of a Zionist Congress.

Trigger warning! These early chances to see yourself beside the founding father of the State of Israel, even the option to take a selfie with him, reveal a show that is unabashedly pro-Herzl, pro-Zionist, and upbeat about his nationalist vision. Like the energized state he inspired, Herzl understood the joys that could be released from Jewish sorrow, a fact reflected in the show’s sometimes lighthearted application of Herzl-iana. The mascot for David Matlow’s own “Herzl Project,” for example, based in Toronto, Canada, and established “to inspire people to be a little like Herzl and pursue their dreams,” is a Herzl-faced hockey player. At a moment when Israel’s frontiers are under vicious assault and cosplaying Mohawks are attacking America through its ally, the absence of doubt here for Herzl’s vision is refreshing. For those looking for a counterpoint, there is always Columbia University.

Whatever else you think of him, Theodor Herzl must be the most consequential theater critic in modern history. The Austrian-born playwright went from working as a cultural correspondent in Paris to inspiring what has become a nuclear-armed state. In the final eight years of his life, Herzl foresaw the descent of liberal Western Europe into barbarism as well as his own reburial in his future nation (by design, he was initially interred in Vienna in a transportable metal casket).

Herzl identified the mechanisms to turn his vision into a groundswell and to set its gears in motion. He mapped out a state that would serve as a beacon and bulwark for the region. In his utopian novel of 1902, Altneuland (The Old New Land), he envisioned a desert transformed into a Jewish metropolis. One translation of this book’s title provided the name for the city of Tel Aviv.

Herzl was not your obvious nation-builder. Born into an affluent, assimilated Jewish family in what is now Budapest, he attended a Protestant high school, where he studied German literature and poetry and at first looked down on “shameful Jewish characteristics.” The exhibition includes such artifacts as Herzl’s second-grade report card (in facsimile, ca. 1867) from the Israelitische Hauptschule Pest along with a rare photograph of him clean-shaven (ca. 1880).

When his family relocated to Vienna, Herzl joined a German nationalist fraternity and remained a member despite its growing anti-Semitism. In 1891, he moved to Paris as a correspondent for Vienna’s Neue Freie Presse at a moment of populist turmoil in the French Third Republic. Three years later, anti-Jewish sentiment came to a head in the trial of Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish artillery officer falsely accused of spying for the German Empire. The exhibition contains several illustrations from this trial and the subsequent degradation ceremony that divided French opinion. If liberal Western Europe could turn so fiercely against its Jews, Herzl reasoned, no amount of assimilation would solve what he called the “Jewish problem.” The only solution, he argued, could be found in the title of his 1896 manifesto, Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State). Several editions, including English, Spanish, Hungarian, Yiddish, Polish, and Arabic translations, are here on display.

A bust of Theodor Herzl, Collection of David Matlow, Toronto. Photo: Kevin Viner.

Calling in his preface for the “restoration of the Jewish State,” Herzl maintains that the “world resounds with outcries against the Jews, and these outcries have awakened the slumbering idea.” The “misery of the Jews,” he continues, can be turned into a new nation’s “propelling force.” History has shown that “the absorption of Jews by means of their prosperity is unlikely to occur,” since the hatred directed at them by their host nations—of “vulgar sport, of common trade jealousy, of inherited prejudice, of religious intolerance, and also of pretended self-defense”—is a “remnant of the Middle Ages, which civilized nations do not even yet seem able to shake off, try as they will.” In fact, the “longer Anti-Semitism lies in abeyance the more fiercely will it break out,” Herzl continues, since the “world is provoked somehow by our prosperity, because it has for many centuries been accustomed to consider us as the most contemptible among the poverty-stricken.” On the question of where this new Jewish state should be established, in one famous passage, Herzl weighs the two areas of recent settlement—“Palestine and Argentine:”

Palestine is our ever-memorable historic home. The very name of Palestine would attract our people with a force of marvelous potency. If His Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine, we could in return undertake to regulate the whole finances of Turkey. We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism.

Driven by necessity, Herzl concludes that the “Jewish question is no more a social than a religious one, notwithstanding that it sometimes takes these and other forms. It is a national question, which can only be solved by making it a political world-question.”

By expanding Judaism from a shared ancestry and religion into a “political world-question,” Herzl found his earliest critics in assimilated Jews. They saw his Zionist call (a term he did not invent but deployed in a new way) as unnecessarily tendentious. At the same time, many orthodox observers believed that only Hashem, and not man, should aspire to return the Jews to Jerusalem (a handful of their descendants can today be seen joining the campus Hamas-niks). It was in the unreformed East, where Jews lived with no pretense of assimilation, that Herzl found his most fervent believers and the misery to shape his nation’s “propelling force.”

A bas-relief portrait of Theodor Herzl, Collection of David Matlow, Toronto. Photo: Kevin Viner.

As Herzl devotes much of his book to the mechanics of nation-building—the handling and reselling of assets, the corporate and social entities that must be created, the use of negotiorum gestio, that “noble masterpiece . . . the Romans, with their marvelous sense of justice, produced”—The Jewish State can be a dry read. Yet the manifesto’s arid structure proved to be the kindling that ignited the movement.

As Herzl traveled to Constantinople to negotiate (unsuccessfully) for a parcel from the Ottoman sultan, his followers flocked to see him at the rail stops. Zionist chapters formed in cities across Europe and (to a lesser extent, at first) America. With the paintings, posters, photographs, pamphlets, books, medals, and statues that came to represent him, “All About Herzl” picks up with the abundant memorabilia produced around the early meetings of the Zionist Congress, the annual black-tie affairs that Herzl produced with enough pomp and circumstance to make his vision a reality. “If you will it, it is no dream,” he proselytized. The second Zionist Congress created the Jewish Colonial Trust and its Anglo-Palestine Bank, which went on to become Israel’s Bank Leumi. The fifth Zionist Congress created the Jewish National Fund for the purchase of land, with the suggestion (made by a Galician bank clerk) that a collection box be placed in every Jewish home.

Herzl gave his life for his cause, dying from the fevered urgency of his dream. In death he became a political martyr, his image an icon, as represented in the exhibition’s final, salon-style hanging of twentieth-century depictions of him, which are inventively varied. In a Rudi Weissenstein photograph from Tel Aviv in 1949, a year after Israel’s founding, we see Herzl’s casket lying in state before its reinterment in Jerusalem—another redeemed captive returning to Zion.

  1. “All About Herzl: The Exhibition” opened at the Temple Emanu-El Bernard Museum of Judaica, New York, on September 17, 2024, and remains on view through January 23, 2025. 

Comment

The map & the territory

Comment

The map & the territory

THE NEW CRITERION, September 2024

The map & the territory

On the life & work of Joe Zucker.

The art world never knew what to make of Joe Zucker, a painter who died in May at the age of eighty-two. Just as pirates became a recurring theme in his work, Zucker took a piratical stance on art history. He refashioned the flotsam and jetsam of pictorial space to raise his own Jolly Roger over the scurvy dogs of modernism in a way that fit nobody’s story of art but his own.

Like Augie March, Zucker was “an American, Chicago born.” Growing up Jewish on the city’s South Side, he spent his childhood at the museum of the Art Institute. His father was a scrap-metal dealer. His mother, a nurse, deposited him at the museum starting at an early age to avoid the ethnic warfare of the streets. Here he absorbed an aesthetic education that was democratic and particularly American, one that flattened chronology and place—a “Veronese one day, a de Kooning the next, Van Gogh’s Bedroom in Arles,” he said. Back home, through an affinity for literature and narrative, he further mixed high and low—Willa Cather with Studs Terkel, Herman Melville with N. C. Wyeth’s illustrations for Treasure Island.

Chuck Close, Joe Zucker, 1969, Gelatin silver print, Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City.

After a stint at Miami University of Ohio, where he played basketball, Zucker returned to Chicago. He enrolled at the School of the Art Institute, earning his undergraduate and graduate degrees. He joked that here he learned to draw a skeleton riding a bicycle from memory. As with much of Zucker’s artistic identity, this was fact and fiction mixed in a medium of dry wit. The tall tale reflects the degree of technical training he received without any particular sense for what to do with it, especially since he said he never wanted to be the next jock from the School of Paris flexing a Picasso brush. “My real love is being an artist and making art,” he once said. “Not advancing the myth of modernism.”

As he stared at his canvas, an early moment of doubt became Zucker’s first artistic breakthrough. Uncertain what to paint, he set about depicting the painting itself—in particular, the warp and weft of the canvas’s weave. His subsequent abstractions of interwoven rectangles brought to mind the rigors of Piet Mondrian but also the basket weaves of brightly colored plastic lawn chairs, which were then a ubiquitous feature of demotic Americana. Zucker’s interest in vernacular, in the elevation of craft and domesticity against the backdrop of high art, in grids and recursive rules, and in the conflation of process and product, were already apparent and continued throughout his career. His circular logic could be confounding, but Zucker flavored such Möbius strips like salt-water taffy—palatable, mysterious, and (as his last name might suggest) sweet.

After teaching at the Minneapolis School of Art, Zucker moved to New York in 1968. He soon fell in with Klaus Kertess and the iconoclastic artists he was showing at his Bykert Gallery, who included Lynda Benglis, Dorothea Rockburne, Barry Le Va, and Brice Marden. Among them was Chuck Close, who became Zucker’s loft neighbor on Prince Street and drinking buddy as they taught together at the School of Visual Arts. In one of his early portraits, Close depicted Zucker in horn-rimmed glasses and shirt and tie, with his hair slicked back in a way that resembled an overtaxed insurance salesman. A study for this work is now in the collection of the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art.

Joe Zucker, Amy Hewes, 1976, Acrylic, cotton & rhoplex on canvas, Mary Boone Gallery, New York.

“Joe Zucker has consistently for over four decades been one of America’s most innovative artists,” Close wrote for Bomb magazine in 2007.

His paintings are personal, quirky, idiosyncratic, and often puzzling. His style is rooted in processes, some simple, others remarkably complex. . . . Pouring, squeezing and manipulating paint, he fashions paintings so personal it would be impossible to imagine anyone else having made them. This is the definition of personal invention.

Close went on to say of Zucker that there was “no greater influence on the way I think about painting, and no person who played a more important role in the formative period of my work and changed my mind about how paintings can and should be made.”

A decade later, when I assembled an exhibition of Zucker’s depictions of the sea for the National Arts Club, Close wheeled into the opening. As I plied him with martinis, he explained how he and Zucker together learned to develop processes to complicate and “de-skill” their means of representation. “This is something you and I have spent a lot of time doing, removing the taboo of talent,” Zucker said in response to Close in that 2007 interview. Here was a problem, I concluded, only for those specimens for whom pictorial talent comes too easily.

As might any artist who chooses to start his career by painting the materials of a painting, Zucker next set about working up an index for his oeuvre-to-be. The 100-Foot-Long Piece (1968–69) is the first work he made in New York. In the 2020 monograph on Zucker published by Thames & Hudson, Terry R. Myers wrote how the work was “like a catalogue of available merchandise (as he called it, ‘the Sears catalogue’),” one that “retains many of the material characteristics of life in the suburban Midwest.” Made up of rectangular strips in a range of styles, some abstract, others representational, created through a wide array of processes, the mixed-media work can resemble a row of linoleum patterns or wallpaper swatches. Faux fabrics are intermixed with a depiction of Billy the Kid. An illustration of the Charioteer of Delphi is featured alongside cones of mathematical plotting-paper sticking out from the picture plane. “One area was wood-burned,” Close approvingly remarked. “When was the last time you saw a work of art by a serious artist that was made with a wood-burning kit?” A young secretary at Kertess’s gallery dubbed the work “tossed salad.” That secretary, Mary Boone, went on to become a mega-gallerist of the 1980s and even represented Zucker for a period in the 2000s. “It was as if all my styles I made at once, rather than the more usual linear development of style,” Zucker remarked. “I made enough styles to last a lifetime.”

Joe Zucker, Paying Off Old Debts, 1975, Acrylic, cotton & rhoplex on canvas, Mary Boone Gallery, New York.

Writing an introductory essay for the 2020 monograph, John Elderfield noted that Zucker may have developed up to eighty different series through his career: “Having many sides is integral to his self-presentation as artist.” The 100-Foot-Long Piece featured a preview of the one that became his most consequential: his cotton-ball paintings. Zucker developed these works using Rhoplex, an acrylic binder developed in the 1950s by the Rohm and Haas chemical company for use in cement and spackle with an “exceptional pigment-binding capacity.” By dipping cotton balls in Rhoplex, which he then hand-tinted and adhered to canvas, Zucker devised a method of painting that resembled a pixelated screen, one that could convey a recognizable image.

At first Zucker used this labor-intensive process to draw a connection to Byzantine mosaics. Woman with Halo and Scepter (from Five Mosaics) (1972), which referenced the art of Ravenna, is now in the collection of the Art Institute. Five Amphoras (1972) is at the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth. From a distance, the works read as recognizable images. Up close, the brightly colored cotton balls resemble piles of tufted carpet. “It took months to roll up the pieces of paint,” Zucker said of his process, “and then all of the paintings were finished in a minute.”

Zucker then looked to the history of cotton and the role of labor in its cultivation and trade. Drawing on photographs of riverboat freight from the American South, Zucker loaded his imagery with historical import at a time when few contemporary artists dared look beyond the clean surfaces of minimalism or the safety of pop aesthetics. Rendered in grisaille, reflecting old photographic source material, subjects such as the riverboat in Amy Hewes (1976), in the collection of the Hessel Museum of Art at Bard College, and the laborer in Paying Off Old Debts (1975), in the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago, convey a haunting presence, as if the history of American slavery were reaching out through the very cotton of the works.

By the time I first came across Zucker’s work, some twenty years ago, he had long since moved to East Hampton, Long Island, where he established a home and studio in the 1980s with his wife, Britta Le Va. Here he coached high-school basketball as a volunteer for the championship Bridgehampton team with players far removed from the area’s multimillion-dollar summer residences. (His efforts were featured in the 2017 documentary Killer Bees, produced by Shaquille O’Neal, about the team as it defended its state title.)

Joe Zucker, Russian Empire, 2012, Watercolor & gypsum on plywood, Mary Boone Gallery, New York.

Zucker was ahead of his time in his use of unorthodox materials and techniques, not to mention his resurfacing of fraught historical subject matter. Yet the Neo-Expressionists and the “Pictures Generation” of the 1970s and 1980s had little use for his involved and at times confusing work. Nevertheless he continued to develop new series, drawing on everything from pegboards and squeegees to the history of Joseph Smith, sometimes combining all three.

The work centered on shipping, marine life, and piracy could be his most satisfying. A 2008 exhibition at Nyehaus Gallery called “Plunder,” which featured rolls of canvas cut through with cannonballs, was particularly successful. For Zucker, the map was the territory. Allegory and allusion mixed with the concrete. “The ghostly spectre of the slaver Trinidad rises among the wrecks and reefs of Madagascar on a moonlit night during July of 1834,” he scrawled across a drawing from 1978, which I first saw at
Nolan/Eckman Gallery. On a diagrammatic image called Axe Lake (Legend) (1994), Zucker included a key that listed the fishing spots and mills along with his vodka martinis and gibsons.

Water served as a recurring theme in Zucker’s churned processes. He saw a connection between the surface of the painting and the “machinery depicted in the painting—objects that stir water, such as planes, windmills, ships, wheels.” It helped that Zucker was himself an accomplished fisherman—skills he developed through weeks-long expeditions to Minnesota and as the captain of a fishing boat he docked in Montauk harbor called The Rodfather. Following a few occasions when I paid studio visits to East Hampton, we motored out to the reefs off Montauk. Zucker knew just the right time and place to put down line for striped bass as he named the fish he caught. “Nancy Pelosi” was his keeper. I called mine “Mahmoud A. Bass.”

In East Hampton, Zucker developed several series that hearkened back to the warp-and-weft grids. I am unsure if one series involving mops dipped in paint, arranged on the wall as if woven together, has ever been fully executed. Another series, of gypsum board hand-scored and water-colored into tight grids resembling tesserae, recalled those earlier Rhoplex mosaics. He titled the 2013 exhibition of this series at Mary Boone “Empire Descending a Staircase.”

Joe Zucker, Robocrate Flagship #2 (1955–1960), 2004, Watercolor, ink & graphite on paper, David Nolan Gallery, New York.

Zucker’s final series was inspired by stories of the Pale of Settlement by Sholem Aleichem, which he read during the 2020 covid shutdowns. Made of cast-off studio trash, such as cardboard, towels, and rubber mats, the austere monochrome paintings of shtetl houses and abstracted snowmen, depicted in a chilling, white landscape, felt like a fresh airing of sublimated forces and materials. In the summer of 2022, I paid my final studio visit to see this work. Zucker by then had already suffered a series of health setbacks, including the consequences of a traffic accident and metabolic encephalopathy. As I slept on a cot in his spider-filled studio, I could hear Zucker in the other room narrating his own demise.

“There’s a surprise to his work,” the critic and poet John Yau explained as I sat down for an interview with him and Zucker in 2016. “The humor is very generous. If anything he’s self-mocking. He’s mocking the idea of being an artist, but in a kind of generous way.” In much of Zucker’s work, as in my final moments with him, you never know whether to laugh or cry.

Comment