Shop PortfoliosVolunteers

ON Paper/Print, American Hand Papermaking, 1960s to Today

Winter 2018
Winter 2018
:
Volume
33
, Number
2
Article starts on page
40
.

Anne Osherson is an artist, translator, and writer residing in Brooklyn, New York. Osherson was marketing and communications specialist at International Print Cen-ter New York at the time of the exhibition "Paper/Print: American Hand Papermak-ing, 1960s to Today." She is an avid printmaker herself. Early last spring, as the first act of the #MeToo movement swept through the New York art world, a unique exhibition was taking shape at International Print Center New York (IPCNY). Curated by Susan Gosin, co-founder of the iconic New York papermill Dieu Donné, and Mina Takahashi, editor of Hand Papermaking and for-mer executive director of Dieu Donné, Paper/Print: American Hand Papermaking, 1960s to Today was conceived as a focused survey of a little-known corner of American contemporary art, which is the intersection of the fields of printmaking and hand papermaking.

Purchase Issue

Other Articles in this Issue

The show meant in particular to highlight paper in all its ver- satility and expansive applications and to present the medium as  an active partner in the printmaking process rather than as merely  a supporting player. In this view, the relationship between paper  and print, papermakers and printmakers, is revealed as a symbiotic  and print, papermakers and printmakers, is revealed as a symbiotic  connection, in which innovations in hand papermaking advanced the  connection, in which innovations in hand papermaking advanced the  field of printmaking as much as new visions in printmaking  field of printmaking as much as new visions in printmaking  demanded advancement and experimentation in the field of paper- demanded advancement and experimentation in the field of paper- making. This subject proved expansive. Relying on their years of  making. This subject proved expansive. Relying on their years of  ex-perience in the field, the two expert curators brought together  ex-perience in the field, the two expert curators brought together  works from over 65 artists, whose approach to printmaking range  works from over 65 artists, whose approach to printmaking range  from traditional techniques like etchings, silkscreens, and  from traditional techniques like etchings, silkscreens, and  lithographs to 3D sculptures cast from paper pulp, handmade books  lithographs to 3D sculptures cast from paper pulp, handmade books  made from pulped clothing—of women, of prisoners—watermarks, pulp  made from pulped clothing—of women, of prisoners—watermarks, pulp  paint-ings, and hybrid formats. Taken in sum, the chosen works  paint-ings, and hybrid formats. Taken in sum, the chosen works  reveal the vast potential of paper as a medium. Remarkably,  reveal the vast potential of paper as a medium. Remarkably,  despite the vol-ume of work created in this niche, this was the  despite the vol-ume of work created in this niche, this was the  first exhibition to ex-amine the relationship between paper- and  first exhibition to ex-amine the relationship between paper- and  printmaking in this way. printmaking in this way. The mediums themselves however, were only one topic on view in  The mediums themselves however, were only one topic on view in  this exhibition. The impossibility of fitting an entire survey of  this exhibition. The impossibility of fitting an entire survey of  nearly 50 years of vibrant, if very specific, activity into one  nearly 50 years of vibrant, if very specific, activity into one  exhibi-tion inadvertently raised questions of inclusion, equity,  exhibi-tion inadvertently raised questions of inclusion, equity,  and equality in the art world. Even as, outside the gallery, our  and equality in the art world. Even as, outside the gallery, our  news feeds be-gan to fill with public accusation after public  news feeds be-gan to fill with public accusation after public  accusation of harass-ment, assault, and the negligent, ignorant,  accusation of harass-ment, assault, and the negligent, ignorant,  or even willful erasure of women and marginalized groups by the  or even willful erasure of women and marginalized groups by the  men who ruled the city's art spaces and organizations, IPCNY  men who ruled the city's art spaces and organizations, IPCNY  provided a stage for a differ-ent approach to inclusion and  provided a stage for a differ-ent approach to inclusion and  exclusion. It started with an urgent question: Chuck Close, whose  exclusion. It started with an urgent question: Chuck Close, whose  landmark stenciled, pigmented, pa-per-pulp portrait (Janet/Pulp,  landmark stenciled, pigmented, pa-per-pulp portrait (Janet/Pulp,  2007) was chosen to fill half a wall of the gallery, had just been  2007) was chosen to fill half a wall of the gallery, had just been  accused of sexual harassment. As a result, some of the decision- accused of sexual harassment. As a result, some of the decision- makers in this exhibition asked hard questions about whether  makers in this exhibition asked hard questions about whether  including him would constitute tacit support for his bad behavior.  including him would constitute tacit support for his bad behavior.  Socially minded curators hold themselves accountable for the  Socially minded curators hold themselves accountable for the  politics of their selections—the biases that influence them and  politics of their selections—the biases that influence them and  the impact that certain choices have on the continuing discourse— the impact that certain choices have on the continuing discourse— and the moment seemed to demand a stance. Would including Close  and the moment seemed to demand a stance. Would including Close  endorse the centuries-old belief that a man's artistry is  endorse the centuries-old belief that a man's artistry is  sacrosanct, and its value can never be diminished by any damage he  sacrosanct, and its value can never be diminished by any damage he  might wreak on his path to "genius"? Excluding an indisputably  might wreak on his path to "genius"? Excluding an indisputably  major work on this basis, however, would likely undermine the  major work on this basis, however, would likely undermine the  exhibition's goal of providing a truly comprehensive overview of  exhibition's goal of providing a truly comprehensive overview of  its subject matter within the al-lotted space, and there was  its subject matter within the al-lotted space, and there was  another consideration: Chuck Close did not create these works  another consideration: Chuck Close did not create these works  alone. Collaboration was the very premise of the exhibition, and  alone. Collaboration was the very premise of the exhibition, and  the papermakers and master printers involved in each project were  the papermakers and master printers involved in each project were  credited along with the artist. To remove the work based on the  credited along with the artist. To remove the work based on the  behavior of the man with the biggest name, in this light, would  behavior of the man with the biggest name, in this light, would  allow his stature to erase the contributions of these lesser- allow his stature to erase the contributions of these lesser- known, but equally valuable collaborators. In the end, the pulp  known, but equally valuable collaborators. In the end, the pulp  portrait was included, providing a key, contemporary example of  portrait was included, providing a key, contemporary example of  art-ists' continued fascination with paper pulp.  art-ists' continued fascination with paper pulp.  As with the curators' choice to exhibit the work by the  As with the curators' choice to exhibit the work by the  controversial Close, community-mindedness prevailed throughout the  controversial Close, community-mindedness prevailed throughout the  entire exhibition, with several wall labels crediting four to five  entire exhibition, with several wall labels crediting four to five  individuals, and certain names re-sur-facing in different roles  individuals, and certain names re-sur-facing in different roles  across different works. Master print-er and publisher Kenneth  across different works. Master print-er and publisher Kenneth  Tyler, for example, was credited in several works in the  Tyler, for example, was credited in several works in the  exhibition—in a variety of formats from lithography and woodcuts  exhibition—in a variety of formats from lithography and woodcuts  on handmade paper to painting directly with wet, colored paper  on handmade paper to painting directly with wet, colored paper  pulp. During the run of the exhibition, he returned to IPCNY and  pulp. During the run of the exhibition, he returned to IPCNY and  gave a lecture warmly recounting his collaborations with David  gave a lecture warmly recounting his collaborations with David  Hockney, Frank Stella, Helen Frankenthaler, and many others that  Hockney, Frank Stella, Helen Frankenthaler, and many others that  empha-sized the convivial, spontaneous moments in which trust and  empha-sized the convivial, spontaneous moments in which trust and  willingness to experiment together resulted in beautiful,  willingness to experiment together resulted in beautiful,  boundary-pushing works. Other supporting materials also showed the  boundary-pushing works. Other supporting materials also showed the  joy and excitement of such collaborations. For instance, a  joy and excitement of such collaborations. For instance, a  timeline on the gallery's external wall included snapshots of  timeline on the gallery's external wall included snapshots of  groups working together at the Women's Stu-dio Workshop, at  groups working together at the Women's Stu-dio Workshop, at  Universal Limited Art Editions, at Pace Pa-per, and at Dieu Donné.  Universal Limited Art Editions, at Pace Pa-per, and at Dieu Donné.  In the sphere of paper-print collaborations, inclusivity is a  In the sphere of paper-print collaborations, inclusivity is a  norm, as could be felt in the curators' reluctance to ex-clude  norm, as could be felt in the curators' reluctance to ex-clude  anyone from the story. The resulting exhibition was not just a  anyone from the story. The resulting exhibition was not just a  showcase of the works themselves, but a snapshot of a mutually  showcase of the works themselves, but a snapshot of a mutually  supportive culture that has sustained an unin-terrupted buzz of  supportive culture that has sustained an unin-terrupted buzz of  activity over half a century. In this corner of art making, the  activity over half a century. In this corner of art making, the  artist is only one player in an ensemble, whose vision provides a  artist is only one player in an ensemble, whose vision provides a  playground for many other makers to investigate their mediums and  playground for many other makers to investigate their mediums and  exert their creativity. As the narrative of the lone genius  exert their creativity. As the narrative of the lone genius  crumbles around us, this exhibi-tion is a welcome glimpse of an  crumbles around us, this exhibi-tion is a welcome glimpse of an  alternative model of artistry. alternative model of artistry.