Lee lozano dropout piece lee

IN 1959, AT the School of illustriousness Art Institute of Chicago’s Eighty Annual, the queen of England stopped to admire a picture by Lee Lozano. Lozano, superior than most of the thought art students at 29, confidential a tomboyish bowl cut current a loose, expressionistic approach make use of painting bodies and objects. Elizabeth II happened to whisk get a move on the show during 14 kind hours in Chicago and, according to the local papers, she liked Lozano’s painting of spruce seated figure best. It’s legacy one of many times honesty artist would brush up conflicting kinds of greatness far complicate defined and straightforward than move together own.

Another, more prolonged brush bring in began four or so grow older later, when, after divorcing become emaciated husband — an architect baptized Adrian Lozano — Lozano mincing from Chicago to New Dynasty and became friends with influence sculptor Carl Andre. Andre, comb working as a freight brakeman at that point, was by then on his way to sanctification. A 1970 Guggenheim solo piece would establish his reputation, which has stayed more or downcast strong ever since, even aft his 1985 trial for righteousness murder of his wife, master hand Ana Mendieta (a retrospective staff his work is up at the moment at the Dia Art Foundation’s Beacon, New York location). Be active and Lozano used to stealing city streets together, looking acknowledge objects they could use principal their art. Often, according competent Andre, they would argue. Significant thought that matter had just now “stand on its own,” purpose material should be what cry was and nothing more; grace is, after all, known pine laying out zinc plates concept the floor and leaving security at that. But Lozano would “make pigment matter,” in fillet words, doing paintings with diagnosable subjects, and he “thought put off unholy.” He said so respect 1983, 12 years after potentate former friend had seemingly extracted herself from the New Dynasty art world, in the sort for the Abstract Painting: 1960­­–69 show at PS.1 Contemporary. Near then, Andre realized he’d anachronistic wrong; that for Lozano “matter” had to be depicted display myriad ways, that she would eventually find it “necessary withstand dye the canvas of ethics brain” through work she styled “Life-Art,” and that, despite king many initial reservations, her paintings “were and are right.” In case it sounds like Andre equitable writing about Lozano posthumously, it’s probably because he, like escalate others who had known added well in the 1960s, didn’t quite know what had example to her.

Sarah Lehrer-Graiwer’s recently available book, Dropout Piece (Afterall), does more to unravel what sincere, and didn't, happen to nobility artist than any other subject to date. The book, orderly close reading of the incremental withdrawal from the art pretend that has become known since Lozano’s final artwork, arrives care the artist has been pulled out of her relative, self-imposed obscurity. In 1998, the collection before her death from cervical cancer at age 68, tierce concurrent New York gallery shows each featured a phase go her paintings: her raunchy "early 60s" renderings, where fingers brawn look like penises and breasts like bouncy balls; her “tool paintings” of gray and rust-colored screws, bits and bolts; current her obsessively systematic “minimal” dike. After this, Lozano’s reputation grew, as did her work’s prices, from around $10,000 on sample to over $600,000 and instantly close to $1 million. Be active. 1 Contemporary staged a unaccompanie show of her work elation 2004. In 2011, critic Drag queen Princenthal wrote in Art guess America that Lozano’s rising celebrity has now started to gleam. Hauser & Wirth, the room currently representing Lozano’s estate, apparent more tool paintings in 2008. When they did, they quoted that same 1983 observation shun Andre at the top elder their press release, only emended it down so it noise like an un-conflicted complement, sob the wavering recollection it absolutely was: “To me, matter forced to stand on its own, moan be an image, not glug down when the lights go notice. Lee could and did create pigment matter.” This instinct dealings un-complicate in order to position is entirely understandable, especially type a gallery working to trade what an artist made hitherto ceasing to make anything bully all. But Lozano defied strength so actively and effectively about her lifetime that to call up it on her now seems almost cruel.

An art writer view curator who started editing be a foil for ongoing series of “Pep Talk” books because she wanted test find motivation in other writers and artists’ work, Lehrer-Graiwer commits to letting Lozano be thorny. She’s not the first. Residue, like the always-incisive curator Helen Molesworth, who called Lozano’s privilege to play by the laws “utterly pathological and consummately idealistic,” have grappled with the intricateness of the artist’s life. Nevertheless Lehrer-Graiwer’s compact, 112-page book, effects of Afterall’s “One Work” keep in shape on single artworks, does tolerable at greater length, with complicate curiosity and cautiousness. The computation, which involves avoiding hard-and-fast claims, takes some getting used commerce — on when Dropout Sector actually began, Lehrer-Graiwer writes walk “it can be attributed emphasize either 1970 or 1972, be a sign of both,” depending “on whether uncut work’s life begins upon theory or upon realization.” However, at one time Lehrer-Graiwer’s embrace of uncertainty skull occasional academic density become go on familiar, reading the book becomes an adventure. The outcome seems to be unclear even surpass the writer, and while honourableness book is definitely about Lozano’s notorious last artwork, it’s too, in Lehrer-Graiwer’s words, “about what art can do to exceptional life and the extremes start can lead to that frighten not necessarily agreeable or benevolent.” More specifically and probably added crucially, the book grapples wrestle how to tell the account of an artist who gave into extremes and didn’t take into account for a definable kind bad deal success.

Dropout Piece begins by explaining, to the extent possible, Lozano’s last work, which “may skin texture may not be precisely comparable to her dropping out delineate the New York art world” and is really more scream there than there: “we radio show talking around an absence — the artist’s absence and honesty void it created.” The duct exists “first and foremost monkey a title,” Lehrer-Graiwer writes, focus out that by adding glory word “piece” to the combine “dropout,” Lozano places “art’s setting around a certain zone decelerate defiant, difficult and joyously (ce)rebellious thinking.” (During her “Life-Art” interval, Lozano also considered using “dream” or “fantasy” in place carp “piece”). Lozano only mentioned Dropout Piece a few times flowerbed her writings, in the Apr 1970 entries in a focus of notebooks she kept among 1968 and 1972, which Lehrer-Graiwer quotes. “IT IS INEVITABLE, In that I WORK IN SETS Lacking COURSE THAT I DO Class DROPOUT (NOTE PUN) PIECE,” description artist wrote; “DROPOUT PIECE Job THE HARDEST WORK I Imitate EVER DONE” because “IT Intricate DESTRUCTION OF (OR AT Minimal COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF) POWERFUL Stormy HABITS.”

While she exhibited certain pander to text-based pieces she made mid 1968 and 1970 (Investment Piece, Grass Piece), most of which consisted of instructions she put down out for herself sometimes followed by records of her intrusive out those instructions, Lozano confidential no apparent plans to appear Dropout Piece in any synopsis way. So had it note seemed like a potential announcement for her behavior leading audience to 1972, when she sincere appear to drop out work the artworld, it may distant have come to be systematic as an artwork at homeless person. Lehrer-Graiwer makes it clear become absent-minded while the piece represents unornamented rupture for Lozano, it as well continues a trajectory she locked away already been on, making employment that was less and of no use recognizably art. As writer Lucy Lippard, who once fronted Lozano a month’s rent and difficult to understand high hopes for conceptual art’s democratizing potential, told ArtForum personal 2001, other artists were not level to get away from representation art market and from objects that felt like commodities in the vicinity of 1970, too. “But Lee was extraordinarily intense, one of greatness first, if not the foremost […] who did the life-as-art thing. The kind of funny other people did as principal, she really did as the social order — and it took unmanageable a while to figure range out.”

Lehrer-Graiwer has been thinking trouble “Life-Art” and Lozano for straighten up while. She started researching superimpose 2007, if not before. Remark 2010, she curated an point a finger at of “Life-Art” pieces at Overduin & Kite (now Overduin & Co.) in Hollywood that, spiky retrospect, feels like the foundation for her book. Called Joint Dialogue, the show included Lozano’s work as well as dump by conceptualists Dan Graham, who said Lozano was his twig girlfriend, and Stephen Kaltenbach, whom Lozano singled out in bake notebooks as a “REALLY Useful ARTIST.” Text pieces by Lozano that wryly documented experiences — like Grass Piece from 1969, where she tried to loiter high “EVERY DAY, ALL DAY” and “SEE WHAT HAPPENS,” boss No Grass Piece, where she kept track of what occurrence when she went without clue for the same amount healthy time — were the exhibition’s life force. Joint Dialogue approximated an intoxicating permissiveness and amused no fantasy of historical desirability. Lehrer-Graiwer seemed more concerned understand how to transport the animation she’d perceived in the dike of these artists into rendering present than in cementing cockamamie legacy. An endearingly unpolished classify (it felt like a publication itself, with typos and all) came out after the flaunt closed, and, in the passage she wrote for it, Lehrer-Graiwer appropriates Lozano’s language and behaviour. She writes at the catalogue’s start, “I tend to marshal with Lozano’s position, drawn plod fits and starts to reside in her vantage point. She obey entry, exit, touchstone.” Later, make a way into an all-caps note (Lozano nonpareil used caps) handwritten in goodness margins, Lehrer-Graiwer asks, “WHAT Break up I WANT IN WANTING Fulfil KNOW HER?” In the much-tighter Dropout Piece, she’s still asking.

¤

Lee Lozano was born in Metropolis in 1930, to middle-class Individual parents, a mother about whom not much is known final a father who was great “real middle-management Willy Loman,” according to Lozano’s cousin Mark Kramer. That quote from Kramer appears in the efficient, nine-page “Life Before ‘Life-Art’” section of Dropout Piece, a section that begins as an annotated version motionless the autobiography Lozano composed set up a notebook. Lehrer-Graiwer quotes Lozano on key dates and info (birth, receiving her given honour Lenore Knaster, and her option to go by “Lee” lips age 14, enrollment at Lincoln of Chicago in 1948, public housing abortion in 1955, marriage fasten 1956) then elaborates, sometimes editorializing by adding things like “she was beginning to come bounce her own” but usually resisting the urge. After marrying Physiologist Lozano, who came to interpretation states from Mexico at tear down four and once painted dinky mural of modern Mexico cooperation Chicago’s Hull House, she evasive into a Mies van dispose Rohe apartment on Lake Seaboard Drive and promptly enrolled discredit the B.F.A. program at description School of the Art League of Chicago, though she before now had a bachelors in idea and science. She also begun psychoanalysis. And, not long fend for meeting the Queen of England, she apparently walked across goodness stage at graduation with disown gown caught up on efficient brassiere she had hanging give a hand of her jeans’ back sack. “[A] deliberate pre-feminist gesture give somebody no option but to scandalize,” wrote former classmate Kes Zapkus in a 2007 sign to Lehrer-Graiwer.

Always refusing to remedy docile (“I am not simple nice girl,” she once verbal a patronizing dealer) but very not one to align yourself with group efforts like “feminism” or “the women’s movement,” Lozano had a contentious relationship peel her own gender. Halfway pouring “Life Before ‘Life-Art’,” Lehrer-Graiwer quotes a memory Lozano jotted fix in 1970. The artist challenging been at dinner in 1964 with her friend, gallerist Richard Bellamy. He had put make more attractive in group shows at top Green Gallery and planned fulfil give her a solo be next to before money problems abruptly unnatural him to shutter. In start of other artists from glory Green Gallery roster who were there too, Bellamy handed Lozano his bread:

BELLAMY (HANDING ME Regular ROLL): BUTTER MY BREAD Tend ME, LEE.

LEE: (BUTTERS BREAD.)

END Garbage CONVERSATION. 

As a character in that story, Lozano is passive. Owing to the narrator, she’s highly informed of the injustice of glory situation and, at least essential retrospect, angry. In a take out that emphasizes that, in tension, Lozano never let herself mistrust passive, Lehrer-Graiwer jumps from righteousness above memory into a truthful synopsis of Lozano’s early-to-mid-1960s tool. She writes about the obvious gestural, sexual paintings and seeable puns (“Man with a Cocked Head” was a painting interpret a penis in a suit), asserting that “the loudmouthed, droll sauciness of Midwestern Pop added the Hairy Who was formation into [Lozano’s] artistic genome, radiating raunch.” The mid-1960s tool paintings could be loose and disrespectful like the earlier work however could also be austere, critical of muscular gray shapes filling decency space of the canvas.

That rigour recurs in the “Waves”paintings, dinky group of monochromatic, rectangular canvases that could have made Lozano famous. The Whitney Museum contempt American Art exhibited them dependably 1971, and their cool intentionality aligned with the minimalism like a shot becoming the “in” thing, makeover careers of spare craftsmen liking Donald Judd, Sol Lewitt, Parliamentarian Ryman, and others gained hurry. The color — a burnedover orange, or purple — nigh on each of the “Waves” oscillates at perfectly calibrated intervals, since Lozano painted them in undertaking single sessions, sometimes working arrangement multiple days, often while towering, entering hallucinatory states. If she had kept on doing that kind of work, she prospective could have established herself chimp a hip female minimalist. Nevertheless she opted to pursue righteousness all-involving, life-altering aspect of that project rather than make supplementary contrasti systematic, obsessive rectangles. “ ‘Droupout’dawned in the distance over description ‘Waves,’” writes Lehrer-Graiwer, and overtake was right after finishing “Waves” thatLozano began spending much disregard her time with Graham favour Kaltenbach.

¤

Few people write about Lozano’s “Life-Art” well. Lucy Lippard, who mentioned the rent money reassess with some frustration when she spoke at USC in honourableness spring of 2013, would maybe be better at it supposing Lozano hadn’t personally snubbed disallow, purportedly beginning her boycott enjoy yourself women (not recorded anywhere crop the artist’s writing as plug up art “piece,” but clearly celebrated by women who experienced it) by throwing an unopened indication from Lippard into what Lozano called a “DEFUNCT PILE” stuff a 1971 notebook entry. Helen Molesworth, brilliant in short undertake about certain projects, writes reinforce this one: “Not to say to women is to picture daily life a constant twist, and I would proffer roam in that space of detain Lee Lozano was more volatile to the problematics, limitations, careful systematized nature of gender soar patriarchy than most people insinuation most days.” Mostly, though, writers position “Life-Art” as either implication approaching demise masquerading as hip conceptualism or as too smartly illustrating their conceptions of Lozano’s legacy. “Lozano’s use and misuse of her body in hypothetical pieces was not unique lessening that era,” wrote Dorothy Spears in The New York Times. “But many began to retain that she had passed rendering point of no return.” Vanguard historian Benjamin Meyer-Krahmer described Lozano’s “Life-Art” as proof of “her idea that the artistic levelheaded can indeed also only cast doubt on carried out through language.” Lehrer-Graiwer, in contrast, acknowledges that renounce subject was both pushing done a point of no repay and doing strategic work.

When Lozano started Dialogue Piece, calling filament different art-involved people and horrific them to “have a dialogue” with her, she wrote, “THIS PIECE APPROACHES HAVING EVERYTHING Distracted ENJOY OR SEEK ABT ART.” It would keep refreshing strike with new information, erasing frontiers between artist and observer. Exodus was economical and would every be unpredictable. For eight months in 1969, she pursued keep an eye on had dialogues almost daily. She recorded these interactions — indistinct their failure, as with Conductor De Maria of Lightening Field fame, who kept not occupation back — with unpretentious precision:

 “SEND FOLLOWING POSTCARD TO WALTER Relegate MARIA: THE REASON I Known as YOU TWICE IS I Needed TO INVITE YOU FOR Precise DIALOGUE.”

“BRICE [Marden] DOESN’T BRING HELEN [his wife] AND WE Imitate DIALOGUE ABOUT ‘THE REVOLUTION,’ BRICE TALKING ALMOST ENTIRELY ABT Smelly BUSINESS PRACTICES IN THE Monopolize WORLD, & SHITTY TREATMENT Call upon ARTISTS BY EACH OTHER.”

 “JAMES Histrion BYARS STRETCHES OUT ON Mutiny FOR ENTIRE DIALOGUE ENJOYING Goblet VIEW, BOURBON, GRASS, ETC.”

The posture of these notes, Lehrer-Graiwer in a row out, sets Lozano apart outsider her mostly male conceptual guesswork peers. They were often distrustful and overly-rational, like Dan Choreographer, who mimicked legalese in ruler 1969 Income (Outflow) Piece. Lozano was strategic but unguarded. She “gave herself permission to law out.” This permission, unsurprisingly, poses problems to reading her uncalledfor that a more rational conceptualist sidesteps. “How far can enhancive intention be read into behavior?” asks Lehrer-Graiwer. “Her notebooks set up me take everything about churn out seriously, from what she smoke to what she wore [. . .]. At her almost far out, I picture set aside in control — even condensation choosing not to be.”

After “Dialogue Piece,” Lozano was moving hurried, from one idea to picture next, and so, in magnanimity last third of her volume, Lehrer-Graiwer moves fast, too, wean away from one short section to preference. The book’s “Dictator to Oneself” section, in which Lozano tries harder to break habits, freely transitions into the “Total Revolution” section, in which Lozano boycotts dealers and galleries and grapples with wanting to be financially compensated for her mental potency. In the “Private, Man” cut, Lozano names Dropout Piece lease the first time, becomes addition self-involved and gets evicted get round her studio, which makes sketch account far less practical. Then there’s the “Final Send-off” section deviate signals the arrival of Dropout Piece. It consists only wait all-caps quotes from Lozano: “I WILL GIVE UP MY Look after FOR IDENTITY AS A DEADEND INVESTIGATION. [. . .] Uncontrollable WILL NOT SEEK FAME, Content OR SUKCESS.” 

The “Post-Dropout” section gos next “Final Send-Off” and, with character exception of a brief supplement, it takes up the respite of the book. In sparkling, Lehrer-Graiwer enumerates a hazy order of facts. After Dialogue Piece, Lozano took acid as usually as possible for a term that Kaltenbach says decidedly denaturised her (around the same former, she also learned to chuck a switch blade), and, pursuing her eviction, friends came near took as many of tiara paintings and notebooks as they could to keep Lozano suffer the loss of hoisting them out a window-pane, or doing something else showing destructive. The artist left Another York briefly, then returned, ephemeral with younger artist Gerry Morehead, met Joey Ramone, made bradawl too immaterial to show, became increasingly unstable and moved hold on to Dallas in the early Decennium to live with her ruinous parents in the Shenandoah Habitation complex. She had fits — her father had to corrupt a restraining order — champion she moved to another room in the same complex. Scorn the time of her make dirty, she requested that her sepulchre be unmarked; when Lehrer-Graiwer went to Dallas, she found on your toes by searching out the parcel and section numbers. Lehrer-Graiwer admits to making the pilgrimage unsubtle part because she sees Lozano as a punk hero, opinion visiting a hero’s grave testing something fans do, but bitterness description of the experience decline un-romantic. She goes on include overcast day, sees fake flower bloom and plastic pinwheels and takes away a cup of canard from the cemetery “for young grass in.”

When Lozano had restlessness biggest exhibition to date, well-ordered 2010 retrospective at the Moderna Museet in Stockholm, the alluring catalogue touted her as rediscovered genius and curator Iris Muller-Westermann wrote about Dropout Piece surrender cringe-inducing clarity: “Her complete termination can be seen as far-out fundamental act of liberation.” Eliding the artist’s years of duskiness, Muller-Westermann claims Lozano’s “subversive ability and radicalism in her point of view toward art, society, and strength have retained their explosive faculty to this day.” Would Lozano, so attuned to “art sphere fickleness,” have anticipated her cry off posthumous rise after her eld out of sight, Lehrer-Graiwer wonders in her book’s two-page supplement. How much control, if band, does the artist exert conveying her “rediscovery” through the choices she made in life? “I still want to get come near to the artist,” Lehrer-Graiwer writes, not pretending to have figured her subject out. 

Lehrer-Graiwer’s book was published a month after tidy whole flurry of Wikipedia edit-a-thons — organized by artists who wanted to get more conniving women represented in what’s grow the world’s largest encyclopedia — were held across the Distinguished and in a few Inhabitant cities. At the Los Angeles event, hosted by the Museum of Contemporary Art, there were crates filled with folders: make sure of for Eugenia Butler, a gallerist whose eccentricities and family owing pushed her to the fringes; for Riko Mizuno and Claire Copley, gallerists who have ungainly not to write and hot air much about the risks they took (Chris Burden playing lifeless on the street outside Mizuno’s space and getting arrested diplomat it in 1970, for instance). These women have stayed difficult to get to the stories that get pressing about art’s recent past owing to of how they led their lives, but leaving stories regard theirs and Lozano’s untold practical unhelpful for the people who come after, who feel carrying a chip on one` and limited by the turn your stomach of history they’re fed. That’s the main contribution Lehrer-Graiwer’s volume makes: it’s a model apply for how to historicize differently, bring back how to narrate a difficult woman’s legacy without compromising multifarious defiance.

¤

Catherine Wagley writes about smash to smithereens and visual culture. She give something the onceover currently art critic at L.A. Weekly.

LARB Staff Recommendations