Talk:Philip Guston

Misleading and inaccurate passages in this article

The paragraph that begins "Philip Guston (July 27, 1913 – June 7, 1980) was a notable painter..." is misleading on a couple of points. Some art historians are free to draw connections from Modernism to Postmodernism via Guston's late work, but this is not something that I think Guston would accept. To make a long explanation short, his viewpoint as an artist is firmly rooted in the Italian Renaissance, particularly Piero della Francesca, another artist, arguably the most important one for Guston introduced to him by his high school art teacher Schwankovsky. The larger point is that Guston, as an artist, had really nothing to do with postmodernism. His painting always had the high seriousness associated with modernism, perhaps never more so than in his "cartoonish" late work. Also, I'm certain that Guston would never view himself as leading anything, let alone a general move from Modernism to postmodernism. There's a bit of a "schematic" feel to what's been written here so far.

CBaudelaire 14:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The paragraph that begins "In the 1950s, Guston achieved success and renown..." is a completely inadequate description of Guston's paintings from that time. The areas of color do not "float" around the center of the canvas. Rather, these paintings are extremely precise and sustained explorations of the aesthetic ideas that Guston was working with at that time and as a result are as structured and organized as the paintings of the Italian Renaissance masters that he so admired.

CBaudelaire 13:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The paragraph that begins "In the late 1960s, Guston became frustrated with abstraction..." is not accurate. Guston's frustrations with his work began around 1960 not when stated by the author. This break with his previous work initiated the changes that led to his late style that only emerged fully around 1968-69. Also, far from enjoying acclaim, the post-1970(approximately) work was never fully accepted by the art world, and to this day Guston, incredibly and very unjustly in my and many other's view, is seen as a second-rank Abstract Expressionist who "took a wrong turn". This opinion was first held by Hilton Kramer and it remains the dominant view. As a consequence for example, it was not until 2004 that a major retrospective exhibition(organized by the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth!) came to New York City, the first since 1965.

CBaudelaire 14:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

While this Wikipedia entry for Philip Guston is excellently sourced and written in a neutral style it is misleading and incorrect on a number of points as I've indicated. Also, it would be very helpful to have something like footnotes. But I do realize footnotes may not be practical given the format, but perhaps something could be arranged, for example, on a supplementary page. As an example of how footnotes might be used, take the second sentence of the entry where the author states:

"In the sixties Guston helped to lead the transition from modernism to postmodernism in painting, abandoning the so-called "pure abstraction" of abstract expressionism in favor of more cartoonish renderings of various personal symbols and objects."

A number of assertions are made in this sentence that, in my opinion, are highly questionable. What's difficult about this is, in what book was it said that 'Guston helped to lead the transition from modernism to postmodernism'? And further, what is meant by 'postmodernism'? 'Postmodernism' is a very woolly term that can mean any number of things, some writers and philosophers say it doesn't mean anything at all. Thus there are different versions of postmodernism, which one is being referred to by the author? Instead of using a very vague term, it might have been easier to include some painters from the 1980s who were influenced by Guston(and there are quite a few actually). And further, what art historian or writer used the term "pure abstraction" in relation to Abstract Expressionism? What was the book or article? How was the term meant? "pure" versus "impure"? I think this entry needs a lot of work if, I hope you'll pardon me, it is to overcome the amateurish tone, but I'm glad there is an entry for him, since he was and is a very important painter.

CBaudelaire 13:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The passages that states "Guston received success and renown" isn't terribly accurate- he never appreciated a high level of success, and certainly the last paragraph that discusses his late works acceptance is not true to history- much of the art world never accepted those works- he did not meet financial success at the end of his life from his work. Also, little is mentioned of his teaching at Harvard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emvinson (talk • contribs) 20:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Responses to CBauderlaire

I've added a 'citation needed' tag to the comment about postmodernism, which basically means that it needs a reference to back it up, and may well be removed if one isn't found. You can remove it yourself. Piero della Francesca is referred to in the article, but the influence could be developed more. I'm sure other editors will be happy to deal with your concerns, but please place them here on the talk page, not on the main article.--Ethicoaestheticist 23:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Portrait of the Artist

If someone could help with the copyright for the image on this page: http://www.theartscouncil.org/artists/philip-guston/. Maybe another person could help with finding another good image that shows a portrait of the artist. Bod (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Philip Guston. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.themorgan.org/about/press.GustonChronology.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629112144/http://christinamcphee.net/about.html to http://www.christinamcphee.net/about.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:39, 31 December 2017 (UTC)