INTRODUCTION

TI

I
li',..on,.rnpo.rry pflnr r\
siñJIr¿neously invaluable assistance for thc dedicated pdnr

one of the most successful ancl one

of

¡he

follower, but which do not claim to tevie$' the
linkages and distinctions between arusts, shops, movemeflts, and coûtinenls. This book has
L.-,

'rlu.t di,parrgcd ¡n forms ol our

rjme.

Between 196o and the present thc print hâs

¡nr ed from

r-he

margirs of art productr,-,n

been

written to provide a cogent history of

Lhe

rts center. No longff ân isoÌâted technicâl specialty, pnntmaking is now â stândard part

conlemporâry print, and to assemblc in one place baslc inform¿tion âbolrt the artists, idcas,
techûiques, afld soctocconomic forces rhat have broughr it to its prcsent pâradoxical

of most âttistic cafeers. No longct conÉned to drawers, boxes, or albums, it has laken ov€r
wall spâces formerly occupied by painting. Not only do the best arrisrc of our tìme make prinrs. some of rhe besr ¿¡rwork. of ,rur umc
are prints.

position.

It

And yet in contmst to ¡hc ¿ctes of ìnk
have been sprlled on palnting, sculÞtùre,

d-rat

should, perhaps, come as no surptise that prinr. havc L¡ccome so viral a medium. gir en that the inost conspicùous âspect of out visuaÌ
landscape today is teproducdon.

fhe

causes

photography, or fìJin, there has been remarkably Jitde critical writing about rhe print.

ând consequences of this lacL hâve been observed by ctitics, sociologìsts, and

Most art pcriodicals and newspapers treat

ptints

as a

kind of oversized philately,

plllosophers. rnd hâ\e nor been lo't ,-,n arlitrs, whose busifless it is to ptovide our visual llves

focussìag on auction prices and othet issucs of lhe ñarket plâce. Serious writing on the subject is concentrated in periodicals dedicated

with meanirg. The cenrul'r ruo mosr important dreoretical texts on ùe print
\Villiam Ivins's Prinß a .J l/iwal Canntîticahan and lfalrer Benjamin's Tbe Vark a.f Art iû tbe
Age

to priûts, most noably

Tl)e

Prifif CblleîtaÀ

Netuslelter, read zealously

by pdnt devotees and

few o¡he¡s. Ptiflt hisþfìaîs such as Pal Gilmour, Riva Casdeman, Richard field, and
Alexande¡ Dückets havc writren insightful arrd

îot about o.f Muhanical Reþroda¡t¡an' ^te ffLists' pints ât âll, but rathcr âbout the effects of reptoduction and multiplicity. Ivins's book,
pubLished

in r953, dealt wÌth

rhe histoty

of

informaürc uurks un the s-b;ccr. bur there
has becn no major

"exacdy repeatable pictodâ.Ì stâtements" not âs artists' playthings, but as inst¡uments
â

intenational surr.cy for

of

mole than a decade, Recen! yeafs hâvc seen

technological and scienúlìc knowledge whose dispetsal made possible rhe creation of the

profurion

oF caralogues râisonnés

of

artjqrs.

prinrshops. and pubtisher. which provide

modern wodd. Ivins also exptessed ùre c¡itical

Painrets. etc. \14rat Benjamin called the more ttadiuonal pleasures of inumate address and something apptoximating the handmade. prinrshops. such as Mothc¡well and Newman. The edition is just one of the pflnl's specific atuibures. To ân evet gÍeâter degree the wotk of art reproduced becomes the wotk of art designed lor reproducibìliq' . interposed . chalky lines ot diaphanous w¿shes. particular techniques are chosen for how thcy look. n. Though dre convenuon of the iimited edition has become the de faclo stâflda¡d among prinrmakers. the "flâttest" of the standard rechniques. ffust and most obviously. furry expanses of tonc. it begìns to be based on another pracuce . tcvelled ¡he lincat riches and tactility of etchìng. it is sdll jusl â conveûuon from that of paiot on cânvâs). can provide crumbly. rTosr prinLs :rc prorJuced rhrough a distinctirc scr ol procedures Lh¿r resulr i¡ distjncÙve appeâmflces: woodcut displays graphtc force. substaûtiâliry.J'k ol II. Slhile thcsc proPerties rìo longei inspite much that is ncw in d1e way of critical discoùrse. and that profoundly aker the content of that which it claims to tcproduce or reprcsent. arLi. The di-intcrcsr ol many artisrs ir the socral ambitions of multiplicity is revealed of the numbers: there âte "uolimitcd" editions of ten and "lirnited" edi¡ions of ro. Âaother distinguishing feature of the print is its procluction by means of a separate ptinting surface or mâüix (â lilhographic stone. they conunue lo be essential to lhe way artists work. and prinr publishets. Jidrography. lhc production of "origioal" prints by artists and the production oÊ movies. advertisements. Instead of being based on ritual.ince I9ûo. ctching and engrar ing offer r[rn and censidve wites of ink. and the othe¡ üLrly poPulisl S INTRO DUCTION in ecLrtion sizcs . it is jusl â qùestioû of u¡hedler anyoûe kePt ltack wbìle sculptots such as Donald Judd ot Joel Shapìro utiLized the concrete matenalily of woudblncks. and a subtle sense of relief.ts \âve inrenrionalJy manìpuJared thi' gap. as well as Sher¡ie Levinc's and Batbara l(ruger's media-cdúcal a¡t in lhe late r98os. and nor only to prints of wotk. are of radically differenr otdets.ooo Cleady. he felt. howevet. firsr pubÜshed in Cermanl in forms cliscussed by Ivins and Benjamin. such as Jim Dine. aod many artists coûLinue lo be drawn to printmakng by the variety and beauty of the surfaces it câû Ptoduce. But over the course of rhc Iasr LJrirry 6ve years.rrouing ir rvith an emb¡ace of somcthing approximatiog industrial mass communicalon and manufacture.). mechanicaÌ reptoduction emancipates lhe work of art ftom its parasitical dcpendence oo rituâÌ. and L-'rhcr char¿crerrsuics have br cn equ¿Uy important Ln its role ìn ''aura' of r u. ârr conremponry ârt.' Benjamin's famous essa1. woodblock. is even less concerned with printmaLing âs an att form. Even ln the most concePluâÌ the instanl dre criterion of authenticity ceases to be applicable to attisuc production. and the translucent clarity of ink on paper (so diferent - they underle Varhol's and Lichtensrein's painted emulatioos of cheap pdnting in the eatly r96os. of coutsc. âquatint ând mezzotint deliver soft.l less ¡han ten prinrs. Mole in draftsma¡like artists. etching plate. PhotoglaPhic reproducrion would thus fotm a come¡stone oI a newly politicized âcsúetic: for ùe lirst tìme in world history. doomcd to withet in a wotld whete rechnology has made it possible for rmages to proliferate ând circularc independendy of an ollginâl. - âfl ârbitrary conÉnement of repJicarion. quâliry of unique eristence was. concenttatrng instead on true mass productron. ot wicleoing it in pùrsuit of thc 19¡6 but only generally available ftom the midr9tos. oî by some peculiat afiìniry lot the physical and matenaÌ demands of the mcdium. exploited the painterly Jicluidity of lìthogaphy.notioû of â visual "syntâx" of reproduction the ideâ ùât âny given medium has strcngths and rveal<nesscs thât determne whal gets tepresented and what does not."' Such ideas about dre socìal impact of reproduction have been critical to much of the arr produccd . âre ultimatcly limited.politics. lhe total function of art is reversed. A1l editions.

Absttact artists in search of a scientifìc. À more importanc obstade in the way of appreciaúng the print is whar we might call rhe artis! and lhe viewer. Historically. as â to atticulate essentially "floutishing ecology" of sPeciâlist Print galleries. perhaps ros y. or sculpture.ubsequenr scramble ¡o iuqui arrisÙc activities But despite the obvious relevance of the print to vital issues of contemporary art. deal of it is simply diFerenL"a \X/bìle â greal of painting. Pardl' handmade and pardy automated. Therc is no prìnr io court cause as it wete. the mark is not intrinsically better or worse thârÌ one drawn direcdy. the odginal pdnt has struck many a. Many PeoPle.. srones. printmaking was a sequesteted atl fotm.. Printe y mechânics âlso encoutage the senal developmenr of imâges "neidre¡ åsh no¡ fowl" ptoblem. \titl rt. but the category. This notion of an tecombined þerrnutationally an aruibute of greal impollânce to a¡tists such as Sol Lewilt olginal pint . providing religious souvenirs for plgrims and playing cards for wasffels. exhibitions and pubJications.. The rvoodcut was was elected to the Royâl Acâdemy on the basis followed aÌmost immediately by engravìng and TNTRODUCTTON g . havc both embraced ¡he mechanlstic "look" and tationaÌizing distance that the mattix places bctween dre dwirdlcd. (fJore that it wâs not dre medilrm in this century to deny tlns diference. has pbìlosophical issues of stmilaricy and dissimilarity. own erhibirions. dtawing. erthtr ¿ fussy lirde craft or ac posters with pteteosio¡s. I am not a printmaker. but did not reach Europe until dre late fourteenth century wheû the woodcul came inlo common use. bul that bore an image developed exprcssly lot the medium r¡ which ir existed is histoncally recent. conEnuc to legârc{ Prints as a commercially tainted addendum to ân artrsis "real work. Vhat has been descibed. wherc thc succcssive "stâtes" ovedie ptevious ones. rhe purpose of dre pliflt was to providc efrcient. visuâlly poindess ptinrs..ll populist and pardy eJitìst. Barnett Ncwman wtote in the preface to his masredul pottfoLio of Lthographs.) Fot much of this century. but this has largely changed over dre course of the last rhirty-áve years. economical reprocluctions that could be widely disttibuted.one that did noL reptoduce d. Arorher problem Jier in the perception oÊ printmaking as an isolated discipline. of the iovention of photogaphy and the . pardy - ptoofs can be taken of successive stages of development in a way that is not possible in painting.. ìnvolvcd in print production. descnl¡ed as r ?rinll/tak¿r âre sends a chill down my spine. and Pop artists mimickìng the wodd around thcm. idenúq' and non identicy.'\ mus! explan that had no plan to make â portfolio of 'prints'. furdlemofe.r p:in¡ing". impersonal foundation lot atr. prejudice femâìns pândemic. said that "To Ênd myselt I Ptint technologies. and to prodùce pdnß thât were "indistinguishable from drawings. even âmong drose most and incomes. and collectors." one of tlle great achievements of the recent priñr has been the transformation of this perceived drsadvantage into a source of meanìng. periodicals.l¡etween the arust's hând ând the final image. Once ptinted.. who of his printmaking. oi plares can be â. Pat Gilmout put it succincdy: "the potentiaÌ the print has fot multiplication is acquired at rhe cxpense olt di¡ec¡ ¡ouch. Canfos. and papet itself Lhât Nev'man and Phillips objected ro. were known from ancient times in -Asta." \{/hat is dre of this contempt? Cettatdy *rere volumes of tech-nically proficrenl. a by product ior rvhoà dre revelation of a process was more cTitical than the affival at â "Ênal" image. uhjle i¡ rhe insdrurronal mainsue¿m of muscums and commercìal galleries the prints of non-spcciâlists have become steadily mo¡e visil¡le. Artists efforr has ì:ccn spcnt ftom Jaspet Johns to Brucc Nârìmân hâve used the doublings and ¡eve¡sals that occü nâllrtâlly when transferting images between plates. though the same mrght bc said pfocess thât does not plâce ât one femove from the sheet of paper the hând thât seeks to matk it." Tom Phillips. compeuúon'.¿win8s . like paper-making.

The edition size of cady Universal Lirnired Editions pubLicauons was since tbey would priot onll rhe numbe' rhat courld be done in "ne day. rejected ones are destroyed.ponsibiliries berwecr printer. and produced m¿sterPieces tl-rat could not have been ptoduced in any othet wây. olren b1 a differcnr 'et ol printcrs in ¡he .6 Such proscripúons no longer carry much of the plâte or stone. even wlule Pop art was rer iraLizirg printm¡king by i¡. trteproducible eflect. the artrsr's farorite numbcr. bur the balance of rc. aod in 1798 by ÌilhoglaPhy. all the imptcssions are inspected." it will ncver be "orignal" enough Even in dre r96os organizauons such as the Pnnt Council of Àmerica continued to defìnc the origiflal Prinl largely by its exdusìon of photomechanicâL means. who eschewed rcptoducúon in favot of spontaneor. and often initiatcs the prolect. many people ¡elused to constder the Ctown Point prtnts "otiginal. original" as a ¡zinring.e rechnique. Print media were now "free" ro bc reclaimed by attists such as \ftListlet. so whethet or not you call it "an olginal print. only which sheets ended up on the top of Lhe stâch the day the artist camc to sign. playing matchmekd betweeo artist and Pinter' Once the printers and the a¡tÌst have a¡tived at a prouf thdl âll are happy uiLh. ã guess at wher rhe îârket ui11 berr. who $ould cut irlrrrcrle block' in prcc:se imitarion of an artisCs prepatatory drawing. but tl:rere temains a lingeting disrrust of priûts lhâl secm to replicâte ân artlst's drawing despite JasPer Johns's demànstrarion chat such tepLicatìon can be and counled in preParatron for dre arust's signing thcm.-r' "original' printing." Increased âcceplânce of collaboratio¡ as a working method has been essential to the rtse vchicle Êor reproduction. rhe edirion in for a number of tbe prints ot a pcrceûtage of the prolìts (usually 1o pet cenc). but the vas¡ bulk of printmaking was of Point Press began working widr Japanese artisans traincd in rhe Uhiyo-c tradition.c a. and the prinler mu-t figure uur what ùe ¿rrisl wents.etchrng. ând how to achieve it. and who ìns¡ituted the Practice of artiÉcially Iimiting cditions to itcleâse rhe aura of tariry- in print production. rhe cdjlion c¡n be prinred.' ^rrists slrch as Rembmndl and Goya discoverecl and rhe rmage is âs recently âs the printed This gtievance resutlaced mid r98os when Cro$'n exploited the rlch fofinal plopctties lâtent ln thc. Subsequent genetauons wete equalìy concemed rone¡ to produc.ame 'hop.nsidered less ¡rrjstic. done wirh an ìnc¡case of meaning rarhcr than a di. :fhe affival of PhorogaPhY and photomechanical pnnl methods proloundly alte¡ed the role of traditional printmaking ì:y negaring its primary function. wtr e dle motc economical lirhngraphl w¿r c. intuiúve.rs. and accepted ones ate stâcked weight. but the equâliry imPlied by dre word is misleading: aestheticâlly thl: atrist ts always in chargc. Though dris was cracdy how somc ¡ [¡r murc roullnc aod rcproducúve ol ¡hc grearert prints ir sort.. cnergeú¡ and inventive manipulation oÊ those means. The publishet purs up the exchange A hierarchy of media was estabLishcd in which etching was deemed lhe mosl "ârtislic" slnce was rhe fu¡rhesl removcd fiom the stain ol it cofiùnetcc. Thrs attempt to delìne thc odginâl Print has done real damage to the cause of prints âccepting otiginâlity as a value in itselF has placecl thc prìnt at an impossible disadvanrage A prinr can never l. which was as a history had been produced. Once the edition is prinred it is curated: ^rt dctermined by sunset.ninution nl ir and rherc is a 'usPìcton about works for which the ârtist did ¡ror ilirectlr' manul¿cture the matrix from which This book artempts to châr! thc forms ancl uses of the print ovet a period of some lhirry- ÌÕ I NTRoD UCTIoN . and artisrs continues to be a topic of conttoversy This intenction is usuaìly called collaborâlion. Lower edition numbers ¡lo not or pâìnting indicate betler ot even earlict imprcssioûs. Edirion 5t7c c¿n bc determined by any number of fâcþrs: lhe srabiJity wirh dtawing disrìncuons berween commetcial prinúng aod arrìsric .

that specialist printmakers a¡c in dire need of critical and public attentioû But my conce¡n hâs been lo rePresent Pdntmaking ân ârt that inLersects and interacts widl lhe crigcaÌ ârt ideas of dre day. tt I have appìied some flexible guidelines. it is often difficult to tell what an artist's "primary" expression is: Jasper Johas's visceral. and autographic of att forms - the prints new ptioiúes embtaced the collabotative and indirect nature of prinrmaking. Much modernist att of the r9Jos. and the exptession of subjective emotional slates throùgh personâl styles.'nomic conlexts of art. r94os. ate accepted as being a ctitical element oF his work. And while most 2re thc producr of telieÊ as ùc venerablc prirr rechnoìogìes - úre di"úncúcn betucen "mode¡n" and "conrempotary" is as much one of characlet printing (woodcut or hnocut). imptinted by pressing the papet agarnsr an image bearing matrix. aquatint. and digitally manipulated photogtaphs. of the print itself. In conltast to this ptiviÌeging of the individual. to that of Robet Rauschenbetg at Gemini GEL. nghtly. sutroundèd ì:y techlicians and arr making machìnery. from the Picturc of a solitary Jackson Polloök. s'hile plenty of "modetn" ârl is still being produced today. as some print curators do. an integrþ of process and materials. rcuJprors. psychology. but I think ù¿r in th( Pasr lhirry-flve )eañ iew important artists have Limt¡ed dremsclves to any single art makrng technique Furthetmore. whether by could be argued. These valucs tended - drere are also watermarks. a desire to tcteaL rhe will to Processes by u¡hich an image atises.ndament¿l Io rccenl art: ¿n inrerest in ùe mecharucs of meaning and ercn biologl . and r95os stressed a hetoic vision oÊ individual idenúty. specialist printmakers both Jim Dine anrl Ed for several years to concenûâre on graphic worki olher arLi'ls trained as pdntmakets only to branch out later Ruscha gave up canvas INTRODUCTION II . Several arrists commonly thought of as pairters uerc. and concerns fu. Hayre! is lhe most famous) 'worked from a combination of subconsctous impulse afld ìntense Physicâl ìnvolvement s'ith ùeir materiâls. Prinrs have become a cdtical fotm because their modes and ptocedutes can atúculate so manv as to encourage technical specialization. recent thoughl ìn many disciplines of the - arl. Modenisl pdntmâkeis (of whom S. perlormaoce or concepruaì zrti.). handmade papets. outwcighs rhat of lus paintings. The book is dominated by attists who are printmakers in addiuon to being Pâinters. pickìng up a br-rrin or b1 picking up a telephone. and the terms of inclusion should pethaps ì:e set oul Though Lhc year rg60 is used here as â srarnng Poinr. bul it is far a suPporl.has rcnded ¡o conside¡ iodividual identity as a product of latger organisms or economies. Jingursucs. flinging paint in his studio.from analyses of the subconscious to ânâlyses of perception and communication. Thus one of the major shifß between what süikes us âs "modem" and what strikes us as "con[emporâiy" is f¡om an internal to an exte¡nal leew . direct physical action. that t¡e most lwentietl-r century. and Jithography of chronology. rhe usc ol paper a.rânding the uorkings of rcproduction essential is to undersranding life in the lare I do nol necessarily beüeve. a exPose or maniPuldtc Lhe social ând ec.I Êve years and two continenls. viral ar his paintìngs and drawirgsl che tmportance of Richard Hamilron ' prinrs. !1. indeed. pride of place to painting that most dìrect. intaglio printing (etching. photostâts. The works' herein rvere all designed by artisrs. ând lhe pteseoce of an image from ì:cing all inclusivc.ts This emphasis may disappoinr people who fecl. etc. a. and a conviction drar under. lnstead of â fixed defìnirion of originality or. Robert Rauschenberg was producìng "contemporary" art in r9io. important prints are mâde by arústs s'hose "prìmary" fotm of exptcssion is Pâinting. Wlrile mode¡nism had given natutal communication. Most exhibit at least tr'¡o of the rhrcc uadjúonal qualiries of a prinr: membership in an cdiúon. for somc period of rime.

ed u hite malcs."' and whìle tlle size of thc matket is not a direct measute of I2 INTROD TI CT ION . reáning ratlret rhan invenúng the forms and idcas that have diven pint market is incomparably latger rn ùre United Stâtes dran in Europe.nsenauri. The arusrs discr¡ssed in this book range from "speciaList" ot "primary'' ptintmakers. Technologies of prinr producùon arc both ingenious and elabotate. As the bi continental pùblisher Peter Blum observed. as lvins observed. This is noL because rhe prirr acriviry elsewhcre i¡ che u. The later chaptets of in F." exporting far more ùat it managed to import.ssion. There is â furthcr demographic imbalaoce. Printmaking without somc form of institutional framewo¡k is exraordinanly dillìcuJt. and artists who have the technical expetltse ând the desire can often avail the-¡seh cs r.uch e. and they requite a cultural factors have resulted in an exchange of ldcas znd i¡fruencec berween l\orth \meric¿ and Europe that hâs (for better ot worse) been netwo¡k of distribu¡ion lo reach their audieoce. rellecung changcs in dre broader âft wofld. telìecting the inescapable force of rhe market .A.rld is irconsequenrial La¡jn Am.mmuniry based ¡rinrshop.n prinL producÙon. "drere's oo question thât the It rmporlânt. even in boù ln rhc coutse of this book.woodblochs and Linocuts can be The v'otks discussed he¡e have aÌmost all been made in No¡rh Ame¡lca ot Eutope. and Eastern Europe all have long and vital printmaking üadiúons. And since mo.. The book ls not. weighted somewhat in f¿vo¡ of American art. of coutse.. buL manufacuted by commercial enterprises. pracúcal sense.m.r commcrcial . largeþ independent of the rest of the r¡¡odd. pdmarily. but it's no! very interesting. even within American art. However. i¡ is also tflre. The book is. I hâve sometimes favored the er'uption of new idcas râther Lhân of the continlration of estabLished o¡es ideas. labot intcnsive.-. Finally. thc Printmakìng lforkshop in New York but most forms of Asia. which will be noticed in any suney of museum collections.l Io prinr' are most often alteady succcssful attists (which in turn meâns drey are most often whitc and male). ùe ¡rt world ¡encl ¡ow¿rd c. This imbalance. The marLer is ¿ prirter Ken Tyler obsened. run up on â kitchen tâble.wope). This mây reflect the blases of a¡r . dre grearer number of prints made.me¡ican aurhor (though one who Lives crcn rhe demographics of print productiun arc showing srgns of change. thât the âptitudes of any given technology impose their structute on images ancl tdeas. - new is prints. deepÌy involved in the matetials and mechanics of rhe medium. force rn any att. namely â \isrory. is exacerbated in the world this book ofct â sJìghdy more balanced perspective. a rechnical quality. make che perrplc uho are inr ire. and cosdy. ri"a.f rcadc mir or c. move the srory along."T That said. It may take lve years to know how to do rt cortecdy. and a greater awareness on the pârt of ârLists of whât prints are and can be. and d-rete are inveotive printmakets from Africâ to the -Arctic but ¡ather because economic and printmaLing are time consuming. but they are (ot should bc) metely a means ro an end. to state the obvious: many oÊ the gealcst p-dnts of the period have been produced by mature artists. then. nrcçrìses . whethcr the pedod under discussion is quattrocento Italy ot r98os New Yolh but it ìs mote of a force in prinfiìâking lor the simple reason tha! so many prinls ârc not only sold by commercial entetpnses. to tl-rose who have never set loot in a pdnrshop. it is representative of the greater number of printshops. furrhermore. -Any artist can. As master preponderance olt Eas¡ Coast b¡. but it is âlso a reflectton of the fact that fo¡ two oF dre tfuee decades under discr-. "knowing how one puts drc color down with a rolle¡ isn't very interesting.into other fo¡ms. print techlologies are discussed in terms of their impâct on ârt ratler tl-ran in any applied. Americr was rhe pre enunent ârt "power. after all. in attempring to comprle the ctude data of objects and evenrs inro çome¡hing resembling a natrative. choose to makc ptints ..

Those for $'hom this book acts as an entry point irto the wodd of contemporâry prints will simply have to market on force ^s mastcr prinrcr Ken Tyler obsen ed. Every genetarion displays oversights and enthùsiâsms incomprehensible of the meclium. reflecting the nescâpable fo¡ce collectors. preponderance of Eas! Coâst-bâscd white males. reáning ralhef than inventing the forms and ìdeas that have d¡iven I2 INTRODUCTION lN'fRoDUCTtON r3 . It may take fivc years to know how to do it cortecdy. I must also o$er ¡he usual book range from "specialist" c:r "pitmatlt' pdotmâkers. The later chapters ¡his book offet a slighdy more balanced perspcctive. but it is also a reflection of biases the Êact that for rwo âl_t of ùe rh¡ee dec¿des ârt wofld.orld. choose to make prints The works discussed here have aLmost all been made in No¡dr Ame¡ica or Eutope. to those who follow. inro somerhing managed to rmpott. {mcrica wa' r}re prc-eminenr "power. Asia. and Eastern Europe all have long and vital printmaking traditions. whet}rer the period under discussion is quattlocento ftaiy or r98os New Yotk. lr is Blum obserwðd."T That said. practical sense. rhe greatct number of prints madq and a grealer awareness on rhe patr of attists of what pdnts ate and can be. aod event." cxporung far mote that it of objcct. but ir is more oÊ a force in printmaking for the simple reason drat so many pnnts ate not only sold by commerciâl enterprises. lheû. and arnsts on bodr both ìngenious ând elaborâte. The a¡tists discussed in this cluaLty. This imbalance. As the bi-continental publisher Peter favored the eruption of new ideas lathe¡ thaû the continuaúon of established orÌes flcw of idea. The book is.. This mây leflect tlle of of an Ame¡ican autho¡ (rhough one who Iivcs rn Europe). reflecring changes in Lhe l. in attempting to compile the crúde dara under djscussion."s and whjle the size of the matket is not a di¡ect measurc of important.rory along.roader latgeþ ìndependent of the ¡est of dre v. most oftcn already successful artists (which in turn means they ate most often whirc and male). eren rhe demographics of prinr froducLion ârc showing signs_of chan¡5e. it is also true.into othe¡ forms. This is nor be¡ausc the prinr acùviry elsewhere in the world is inconsequential - woodblocks ând llnocuts cân be hâve fun up on a krtchen table. I have tried to balance The book is not. I have sometimcs be no¡ced in any survey of museum collections. of the contincnß. rvdhtcd somewhar in favor of Amcdcan art. namely a pctsonal tastc by consulting pint curators. as lvins obseffed. ând ardsts rvho - Latin Àmcrrca. !o stâte the obvious: many the greâtest prìnts of ùre period havc ì:een produccd by mature ârtists. ând that lt may be time to take a look. futthcrmore. thât ùe aptiûdes of any given technology impose their strLrcture on both pint production. entcr¡rises even^nd ir In ùre course of this book. dealets. it ìs representative of the grcâtcr dreit wori¡. readers will doubdess fìncl points of disâgreement. afrer all. ìs exacerbated ìn the wodd of priûts. but rhey are (or should bc) merely a means to an end. --loowing how one purs the color down wid-r a roller isn't velT interesting. bìrt it's not very ìnteresting. Still. labor lforkshop in Neu rntensive. to those who have nevcf set foot in a printshop. print technologies a¡e discussed in terms oÊ images and icleas. che people whu are i¡vired Lu make priîts ùe theif impact on art ¡ather than in any applied. and there ate inventive printmakers lrom Âfrica to ¡lre the technical expertise and the clesire can ofren av¿il Ùtcm-elves ol acadr'mic or comn uniq based printshops such as the Printmakrng Arctic but ¡ather because economic and Yurk bul most lorms printmakìng aie time-consuming. There is a further demogrâphic imbâlance. which will resembling a natratìve. mure rhe . primaril¡ a technicâi historl. and costl¡ and thcy requite a ol cultlual fâctors have ¡esulted in an exchange of ideas and inFuences berween North America ând Europe thar has (for berter or worse) been network of distribution to reach tiei¡ audience. Any â-rtist can. "the¡e's no question that the print mffkct is rncomparabÌy larger in the United Shtcs chan ìn Europc. Techlologìes of prinr producLion are at. However. but manufactured by commercial entefprises. decply involved in drc mate¡ials ancl mechanics number of prìntshops. even rvithin American disclaimer for attempting to write history as it is occurring. world rend Luward conseñâLiviqm. since most cLrmme¡ci¿l rhc arl temind themselves ùrat the¡e exist far more than are contained in this book. The market is a in any at. Fìnally. Printmakng witàout some form of institutronal framewo¡k is extraordinarily diÊìcult. of coutsc.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful