Abstract
After seeing the retrospective of Gerhard Richter’s paintings at the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 2002, I began to think about iconoclasm and the fact that in the West it lives on, not in its old haunts—religion or politics — but in modern art. Even now, long after Clement Greenberg’s dogmas have faded and Ad Reinhardt’s teleological works have entered art history, the unself-conscious anachronism remains an arch enemy of the contemporary art business. By business, I mean the buying and selling of new art, museum shows, and the critical apparatus that attends to it. Visual art, painting in particular, has had a singularly radical modern history that separates it from literature, music, and film. Lots of people can go to movies or buy cds and books, but few have either the money or the desire to buy art by living artists. Although the relative smallness of the art world has freed painting from the conservative drag put on more popular genres, it has also boxed it into an almost continual endgame.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Gerhard Richter: Why Paint?
Quoted in Robert Storr, “Interview,” in Gerhard Richter: Forty Years of Painting (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2002), 303. Catalogue for the exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, 14 February–21 May 2002.
Ibid., 303.
Ibid., 19.
Ibid., 22.
Quoted in Armin Zweite, “Gerhard Richter’s ‘Album of Photographs, Collages and Sketches’” in B.D.H. Buchloh, J.F. Chevrier, A. Zweite, and R. Rochlitz, Photography and Painting in the Work of Gerhard Richter: Four Essays on Atlas (published on the occasion of the exhibition in Barcelona, Museu d’Art Contemporani, 1999), 94.
Roland Barthes, Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photographs, trans. Richard Howard (New York: Hill and Wang, 1981) 76.
Benjamin Buchloh, “Readymade, Photography, and Painting in the Painting of Gerhard Richter,” in Neo-Avantgarde and Culture Industry: Essays on European and American Art from 1955 to 1975 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000), 381. Buchloh’s chief concern is to place Richter in the context of cultural and art history. See also his essay in the catalogue for Richter’s exhibition at Marian Goodman Gallery, New York, 14 September–27 October, 2001.
Barthes, Camera Lucida, 92.
Gerhard Richter, “Notes, 1986,” in Hans Ulrich Obrist, ed., Gerhard Richter: The Daily Practice of Painting, Writing and Interviews, 1962–1993 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; London: Anthony d’Offay Gallery, 1995), 124.
Storr, “Interview,” 290.
Richter, “Notes, 1983,” in Daily Practice, 102.
Robert Storr, “Permission Granted,” in Gerhard Richter: Forty Years of Painting, 83.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Princeton Architectural Press
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2005). Gerhard Richter: Why Paint?. In: Mysteries of the Rectangle. Princeton Archit.Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-56898-659-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-56898-659-9_9
Publisher Name: Princeton Archit.Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-56898-518-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-56898-659-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)