ABSTRACT
In his review of an exhibition of paintings by Cézanne held at Paul Rosenberg’s gallery in New York, in 1942, Greenberg notes what he thinks are the inadequacies he found in two paintings, one of Mont Sainte-Victoire and a still-life. The fact is, he concludes, that
much of even the best of Cézanne’s art seems unconsummated. Pictures filled with superb passages such as would by themselves earn any painter a great reputation fail somehow to coagulate, and remain instances of great painting rather than great paintings. Lacking the simultaneous unity and diversity and the inextricability of part from part of realized wholes, they miss that final perfection . . .1 [My italic.]
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
‘When did art get into the head, then?’ (question attributed to Speaker B).
