Hudson River Museum I Want Candy Exhibition Catalogue

HUDSON RIVER MUSEUM

This catalogue is being published in conjunction with the exhibition I WANT Candy: The Sweet Stuff in American Art, organized by the Hudson River Museum, Yonkers, June 16 to September 2, 2007.

The exhibition and catalogue has been made possible by a gift from

ISBN: 0-943651-34-4 Copyright 2007 Hudson River Museum 511 Warburton Avenue Yonkers, NY 10701-1899 914.963.4550 www.hrm.org Catalogue Design by James Monroe www.jameshmonroe.com

Director’s Forward

It is particularly appropriate that I WANT Candy:

No exhibition of this kind would be possible

The Sweet Stuff in American Art should be

without the cooperation of a large group

presented at the Hudson River Museum. Although

of lenders who have our grateful thanks.

the current exhibition focuses on sweets as

Erica Blumenfeld, the museum’s Registrar,

reflected through the eyes of 42 contemporary

effectively organized the loan paperwork and

artists from around the nation, the City of

shipping arrangements. James Cullinane,

Yonkers, where the museum is located, has long

Chief Preparator, worked to design an elegant

had an association with sugar. Daniel Putnam

and attractive show. Jean-Paul Maitinsky,

Brinley’s Hudson River View (Sugar Factory

Assistant Director, Programs and Exhibitions,

at Yonkers) c. 1915, provides a window onto what

oversaw the development of the exhibition in

was historically, along with elevators and

addition to his duties as head of the museum’s

carpets, one of the leading industries in Yonkers.

programmatic and educational activities.

Today, the sugar industry remains in Yonkers,

But credit for the exhibitions existence is wholly

a reminder of the past and also a harbinger of

due to the efforts and insights of Bartholomew

the city’s vibrant future. It is fascinating to think

Bland, Curator of Exhibitions. He brought together

that sugar, so uniform in its production, could

the research and the artwork and wrote the

be the basis for such a varied artistic response in

publication. We hope you enjoy I WANT Candy as

the group of excellent artists assembled here.

much as all of us have enjoyed working on it.

Michael Botwinick

2

Daniel Putnam Brinley (1879-1963) Hudson River View (Sugar Factory at Yonkers),c. 1915 Oil on canvas 31 7/8 x 30 1/8 in.

Collection of the Hudson River Museum, Yonkers, NY Museum Purchase, 95.3.1

3

Candy: A Consideration

Bartholomew F. Bland Curator of Exhibitions

Candy is endlessly enticing. The multitude and

There are scattered examples of sweets in

variety of different artistic works incorporating

American nineteenth-century painting, but they

candy parallels the profusion of commercial

are rare. One of the reasons for this paucity is

sweets available in an unending array of different

that the bright coloring of artificial dyes and the

shapes, sizes, and colors. In the years since the

geometric uniformity of factory production were

advent of Pop Art in the late 1950s, contemporary

not readily available in the pre-Civil War era.

artists have embraced confections as one of their

But the lack of candy subject matter also

most popular subjects, and those sweets serve

suggests Americans were uncomfortable with

as metaphors for everything from the innocence

overtly sensuous visual displays of sugar.

of childhood to the promise of debauchery.

A few early artists such as Raphaelle Peale

Although images of candy are now frequently

(1774-1825) incorporated sweets into their works

invoked in video art and installation works as

but usually in keeping with their restrained

metaphors ranging from decadent consumerism

aesthetic styles, which did not signal careless

to childhood innocence, one of the pillars

abundance to a still somewhat puritanical

of candy art remains the traditional still life.

American audience suspicious of art.

Successful still life has often been judged by

Raphaelle Peale is generally considered the first

its degree of verisimilitude, and artists have

professional still life painter in America.

long recognized the relationship between the

His work’s great merit is its deceptive simplicity,

tongue and the eye. Seventeenth century Dutch

which evoked the “plain living” of America

still life painting, which presented silver ewers,

when contrasted with more elaborate Dutch and

lobsters, and lemons, strove to make the viewer

Flemish models. In this respect his work echoes

desire the good things in life, and the desire to

that of the restrained style of eighteenth-century

present foods tempting to the taste buds remains

French still life painter Jean-Baptiste-Simeon

in contemporary still life. The sweet taste that

Chardin (1699-1779). Still life was a genre of

makes people yearn for candy is symbolized in

painting extremely rare in the United States in

the bright colors, geometric forms, and strong

the first decades of the nineteenth century,

patterning that make candy the perfect subject

when portraits were the most popular style of

for still life painting.

painting. The genre was widely considered to be inferior “not just because of the low objects that

4

The candy still life is a contemporary variant on

it depicted but because of the kind and degree

the traditional still life featuring fruit or flowers.

of imitation, of deceptive illusion, implicit in their

depiction.”1 Raphaelle Peale’s fifty or so

Thiebaud was equally influenced by the plain,

surviving works typically show modestly scaled

simple works of Raphaelle Peale. Thiebaud’s

objects in austere settings.

career of creating distinctive still life was often

2

associated with the American Pop Movement, Peale’s fruit was often bruised or dimpled, with

but, in fact, he reached his stylistic maturation

brown specks suggesting the passage of time.

just prior to the Pop Movement and influenced it.

Occasionally, he would paint a small, modest frosted cake with distinctive red and green sugar

Wayne Thiebaud

crystals baked into a shape that suggests his cakes may all have emanated from the same

Thiebaud’s use of repetition and reduction allies

simple tin. Raphaelle Peale’s inability to find

him with the Pop artists but his work stands

commercial success painting still life probably

apart from that movement. Whereas Pop Art

dissuaded many young American artists from

is ironical, Thiebaud’s carefully ranked rows of

following in his footsteps; but after the

cakes, pies, and candies laid out like modernist

Civil War, artists such as John Peto (1854-1907)

grids, are taken seriously by the artist and

and Joseph Decker (1853-1924) began to feature

presented at face value. It is hardly possible for

brightly colored hard candy in the their canvases.

someone to contemplate one of his pastry-case

Contemporary artists such as Neil Christensen

paintings and not subsequently view the bakery

keep Peto’s and Decker’s style of painting

display at the local deli as a series of abstracted

alive today.

shapes and colors. The influence of Pop artists such as James Rosenquist, whose work contains

It was not until the second half of the twentieth

not-so-veiled criticism of consumer society,

century, when the wide availability and mass

is not to be found in Thiebaud’s paintings,

marketing of sweets made them ubiquitous,

which celebrate the abundance of American life

that candy became a major subject for American

in the postwar years.

artists. Traditional still life has not been readily associated with modern art, but Wayne Thiebaud

Thiebaud’s still life work, with its vacuum-

was largely responsible for reinvigorating still

like silence, draws not only on Peale, but also

life painting and bringing it back into the artistic

on the stillness and long shadows of Edward

mainstream. Despite the impact of a large, loud,

Hopper. Italian Desserts, 1986 (fig. 54) is a classic

and intensely colorful consumerist culture,

Thiebaud image. Completed in pastels, a medium

which had such an important impact on Pop Art,

in which the artist is a master, the image has

5

his typical hallmarks in the cropping that cuts

work. The idea of want, of desire anticipated

the pastries at the edges of the frame and in the

but unfulfilled, runs through the work of most

raked lighting that suggests a theatrical spotlight

of the artists in the exhibition. As Thiebaud said

or the clear, high noon sun of Thiebaud’s native

of his luscious desserts locked behind glass

California. Like a Hitchcock blonde, the desserts

window cases, “it’s the exclusionary aspect that

entice the viewer but remain serenely perfect,

gets me—there’s a lot of yearning there.”4

sealed and set apart behind the invisible glass Contemporary Variations on Still Life

wall of the pastry-case, to be looked at, not touched. Italian Desserts is an image Thiebaud first created as an etching in 1979 and then

Sharon Core’s inventive appropriation is the

returned to at a later date, adding the delicately

most obvious homage to Thiebaud’s painting.

hued colors in pastel, which, like candy, are

Her photographs, each of which is a simulation of

solid, yet ephemeral. Pastels were the perfect

one of his canvases, reverse the typical process

medium for Thiebaud to “depict dust in the air,

of a photograph used as the basis for a painting.

the bloom of a peach, or powder on a donut.”

Instead, Core’s Thiebauds series (figs. 13 and 14)

3

uses his paintings, (themselves often painted Despite Thiebaud’s accomplishments, it is

from memory rather than from life) to construct

tempting to ask, “Is still life relevant today?”

original photographs. “Through a mixture

Still life can easily be seen as outmoded—visions

of frosting, sculpture, tromp-l’oeil painting

of sensual perfection in a chaotic and combative

and manipulated lighting and camera

world. They are perhaps too easy to love in a

angles, she faithfully reproduces Thiebaud’s

contemporary art scene that for three decades

originals, capturing their colors, textures,

has eschewed beauty. However, the universal

shadows, and perspective.”5 Her photographs

appeal of Thiebaud’s work reinvigorated still

leave the viewer questioning the relationships

life with pictures of mass manufactured sweets,

between reality and illusion, perception

the product of modern society. It was this new

and innovation.

subject matter, rather than the classic bowls

6

of fruit, which has continued to energize the

Neil Christensen’s Strawberries, Cupcake,

medium, allowing contemporary artists to use the

Coke, and Cherries, 2002 (fig. 10) is a formal

style to comment on the changing world around

contemporary composition harkening back to

them. Thiebaud spawned two generations of

the 1800s. Unlike the heightened flash-and-

artists who have been deeply influenced by his

bang drama in works by the Pop Artists or

Photorealists, his ordered placement of objects

creating a hyper-lusciousness that is a contrast

suggests Thiebaud; but Christensen embraces

with Thiebaud’s more austere presentation.

the simple, dark backgrounds of the nineteenth-

Flack’s lush colors are bold and unsentimental,

century American still life. Christensen’s work

her works do not succumb to “sweetness” [an

usually combines elements of contemporary life,

ironic danger for any artist depicting candy] but

here depicting the varying degrees of sweetness

shimmer with vibrancy. In contrast to the ordered

from the “natural” strawberries to the classic,

rows of Thiebaud’s cakes, Flack’s “placement is

mass-produced “artificial” can of soda.

haphazard. The clarity and harmony of a classical

Cara Wood Ginder’s small-scale paintings (fig. 28

composition is absent,” and the isolated calm

and 29) utilize a similar dark background but her

instilled in individual sweets in Thiebaud’s work

works are miniaturized, contemporary versions

is subverted for a richer but more chaotic effect.7

of trompe l’oeil. In the center of each panel is

Hershey’s “Kisses” have proven to be a favorite

a small, exquisitely painted object from everyday

subject for artists depicting candy, since the

life. The brilliantly colored popsicle and ice cream

silver-wrapped sweets make explicit the links

cone project vividly from the dark surfaces, which

between richness, romance, and chocolate.

appear as small blackboards with tiny, strange

Second generation photorealists, such as

“chalk” drawings in the corners. As the artist

James Del Grosso, have continued to explore this

notes, “I try to infuse my still-life’s with optimism,

interest in the allure of packaging in works like

irony, spiritualism, even sarcasm, but cloaked

Big Kiss, 2007 (fig. 18). Here the wrapped candy

in artistic realism.” 6

is such a sensual sight that it renders the actual chocolate below something of a disappointment.

Despite Thiebaud’s perceived link to the Pop Movement, his work probably had the most

Kim Mendenhall’s Six Desserts for Wayne, 2004

pronounced influence on the 1970s Photorealist

(fig. 42) is a second generation photorealist’s

Movement, not only as a model but also as

straightforward tribute to the master and makes

a point of departure. Photorealism, a term first

an interesting contrast with Italian Desserts.

coined by the dealer Louis Meisel in 1969, was,

Whereas Thiebaud crops his image and moves

as its name indicated, indebted to photography.

his plates ever so slightly out of alignment subtly

Hers (Hershey Kisses), 1977 (fig. 27), painted

subverting the balance of the picture, Mendenhall

by Audrey Flack at the height of the first wave

maintains a rigorous overall geometry, filling her

of interest in Photorealism, is a fine example

canvas with a pyramidal shape that grounds the

of the field. Her painting “amps up” reality,

composition and gives her desserts a feeling of

7

solidity. However, her palate is more subdued

Dan Douke explores the visual intrigue of candy

than Thiebaud’s, and unlike those in Italian

packaging and its relationship between the

Deserts, her shapes are not simple or uniform

mundane and the marvelous. He examines the

but rather a series of complex geometric forms,

“strangely stunted effect of Pop Art as it freezes

softened by runny syrups. Beverly Shipko is

in time the look and appeal of graphics and

another artist whose work has been strongly

product design.” 9 Douke’s Friends, 2000 (fig.

influenced by Thiebaud, although her paintings,

21) shows the artist’s fascination with the way

such as the devoured Bonnie’s Carrot Cake,

Japanese culture has assimilated the cheerfulness

2006 (fig. 51) evince a great degree of humor

and artifice of classic American Pop, then

and a suggestion that the invisible “glass wall”

transformed and reintroduced it back to America.

of desire can be breached. Still, she recognizes

Swear in Pink, 2004 (fig. 20), with its vibrant

the basic tension inherent in her subject matter,

background and cellophane wrap, showcases

noting, “... it is particularly ironic that I’m

“the luminosity and isolated perfection of these

obsessed with painting tempting desserts.

perfect objects” and gives the painting a lurid

I have a constant battle with hunger, a history

reality that evokes the work of James Rosenquist

of diabetes while I was pregnant, and a father

or Tom Wesselmann.

10

who is a dentist.”8 Some critics have described Emily Eveleth’s

8

Ralph Goings’ delicate watercolors (figs. 30, 31,

paintings of sugar-coated jelly doughnuts, such

and 32) also reflect Thiebaud’s influence

as Veil, 2002 (fig. 24) or Inverse, 2006 (fig. 23),

in their deadpan presentation, heavy shadows,

as also being contemporary takes on classic Pop

and simplicity of form, but Goings creates moody

Art reminiscent “... of James Rosenquist’s glossy

backgrounds that integrate his pastries more

consumerist paintings from the 1970s.”11 However,

casually into their surroundings, suggesting

Eveleth’s works are both more restrained and

the “every day-ness” of a casual diner setting,

more sinister than Pop Art. Her canvases shun

rather than the perfect, clinically scrutinized

“the brassiness of Pop icons, their idealized

specimens of Thiebaud’s work. Tjalf Sparnaay’s

presence and meticulous compositions recall

Apple Pie, 2005 (fig. 53) is more dramatically

instead Renaissance and Baroque painting.”

depicted on its lace doily. The artist takes the

Her palate is subdued, even “noir-ish” as if a

most pedestrian of pies and transforms it with

crime had just been committed. Her pastries are

lush colors and dramatic light into the most

wounded, oozing victims rendered blob-like and

sophisticated of desserts.

inert in the face of imminent consumption.

12

No artist has ever paid homage to the mundane

Humor and Childhood

beauty of cellophane as eloquently as Janet Fish.

In her work she “captured the way highlights

Much candy art is funny, though it is often

and reflections played over the plastic, intruding

presented with a touch of cruelty. In the eyes

on and complicating the simple forms inside the

of some, desire can seem faintly ridiculous, and

tight skin.”

gluttony is always an easy subject to skewer.

13

Fish’s paintings are about quiet

moments filled with promise. There is nothing

The consumption of large quantities of sugar also

sinister lurking in the corners near her beautifully

carries significant class overtones, suggesting

wrapped lollipops—there is no rotting fruit or

a lack of rigorous dietary concern or self control,

skull’s head to temper the viewer’s unalloyed joy

a willingness to subvert the Duchess of Windsor’s

in beauty. Her ice cream sundae does not become

aristocratic edict that “You can never be too rich

a melting contemplation on the temporary nature

or too thin.” Will Cotton’s Trailer, 1998 (fig. 16),

of life but rather stands a source of

a humorous riff on the traditional gingerbread

ever renewing visual pleasure. Her work, like

house, is both funny and unnerving. Conjuring

that of many still life painters working today,

the alluring but dangerous witch’s cottage from

presents food in way that has been influenced

the childhood tale of Hansel and Gretel, it plays

by advertising, yet not confined by it.14

upon the suspect nature of sugar, in which allure

Like Fish, Don Nice has made a career of finding

may lead to gluttony and disaster. The piece

the beauty in representational art, although

also references the class indicators associated

he prefers to monumentalize and make epic

with trailers, in which sugar acts as a lowest

individual objects. Depicting two well-known

common denominator of people not attuned to

candy brands in Tootsie Pops, 1973 (fig. 43)

more sophisticated tastes. The placement of the

and Caramel, 1992 (fig. 44), Nice eschews

trailer as a singular, rather lonely object isolated

Thiebaud’s long shadows or Fish’s vignette-like

from its surroundings also suggests Thiebaud’s

surroundings to present a straightforward

influence on Cotton’s development as an artist.

view of sweets. His work invites the viewer to

The trailer seems strangely uninhabited, waiting

consider small variations in commercial packaging

for its family of decorated gingerbread men to

color and form and to consider what makes

return home.

an object tempting to the eye.

Red Grooms’ Bubble Gum, 2001 (fig. 34) is a funny grotesque. In this wall sculpture, the little girl’s cheeks bulge out enormously, and she

9

cradles the huge bubble she is blowing, which

or ectoplasm, growing sloppily, unnervingly

threatens to consume her. The position and

primordial.

color of her chewing gum suggest an enormous distended stomach. This image is particularly

Zane Lewis’ Wonka’s Chocolate Waterfall, 2006

unsettling, as Americans have grown increasingly

(fig. 39) is one of a series that explores the

fretful about poor nutrition and childhood

artist’s fascination with childhood, fountains,

obesity. Grooms has stated that his work is

and the nature of water, particularly the eternal

“playing at the edges of the tasteful and the not

search for the Fountain of Youth. The title of

tasteful, the sophisticated and the raw, craft and

the piece references the candymaking genius

crudeness.”15 Tellingly, the little girl’s eyes do not

in Roald Dahl’s novel for children Charlie and

meet the viewer’s, but roll back in her head as

the Chocolate Factory and its two popular film

if she were engaged in her own private, sugar-

adaptations. Lewis’ work suggests the chocolate

induced ecstasy.

cravings of childhood parallel adult “cravings” for youth. To create his work, Lewis digitally converts

In a more adult but equally surreal take on

images of fountains into paint-by-number

the allure of blowing bubbles, Mary Magsamen

canvases, which reinforce the idea of childhood.

and Stephan Hillerbrand engage in a strange

Like Richard Hickam’s use of viscous paint to

competition of “anything you can do, I can do

mimic the rich thickness of his Blueberry Royal

better.” Their video air-hunger (bathroom) 2003

(fig. 37), Lewis’ runny acrylics are the perfect

(fig. 40) shows the artists repeatedly outdoing

medium to suggest melting chocolate.

each other blowing massive bubbles out of wads of pink chewing gum. In their work, “the bubble

Cindy Best’s Dentyn-ism #95 (fig. 8) is part of the

gum blowing activity . . . serves as a physical

artist’s series exploring cinnamon-flavored foods.

manifestation of breath or a metaphor for the

Unlike the sloppy chomping and chewing of

act of creation not from a romantic point of view

air-hunger, Best presents the viewer with pristine

but rather from a difficult, competitive, childlike

gum—cool, dry raw material, untouched by teeth

behavior with its associations of crudeness and

or tongue. Her work is elegantly minimalist,

While Groom’s work is a figurative

and her softly focused glamour lighting and

baseness.”

10

16

caricature, the overall effect of air-hunger

restricted palate give the piece a restraint that

(bathroom) is more organic. Unlike the glossy,

is not common in much candy-inspired art.

enameled, hard-edged quality of Groom’s work,

Her gum is abstracted— so solid and monumental

air-hunger’s bubbles suggest quivering bio-mass

that it could be construction material—a pink

girder waiting to be heaved into place. Best’s

Modern candy is a triumph of the artificial and

subtitle for the piece Picking a scab may leave

as such is often presented as a metaphorical

a scar, but it sure is fun, is taken directly

contrast to the virtuous: natural, wholesome, or

from the inside of a real Dentyne wrapper. The

nutritious. This is not surprising. It is rare to find

grossness of the title, conjuring an unpleasant

much colorful delight created from unprocessed

childhood compulsion, is seemingly at odds with

sugar cane. In Travis Conrad Erion’s Rock Candy

the refinement of the image. Marylyn Dintenfass’

(fig. 22), the tiny, brilliantly colored artificial

Good & Plenty: Ultra Blue, 2005 (fig. 19) also

peppermint acts as a kind of visual rebuke to

takes a well-known candy brand and emphasizes

the ponderous gray “natural” dullness of stone.

its elemental, abstract forms. Dintenfass’ candies

Many of Erion’s titles are plays or puns on the

could as easily be blood platelets or bacteria—or

situations they present. Erion often uses his

perhaps sugar induced morphing of human DNA.

titles to tell a story. He tries to find a larger meaning in modest inanimate objects, believing

Like Dentyn-ism #95, Ralph Salvest’s Red

that they open a window on life in contemporary

Stalactite (fig. 47) gives gum an elegance of

America. His work seeks to find larger meaning

form. But his work, which owes a debt to Marcel

in small, humorous truths. Like Rock Candy,

Duchamp, is a meditation on disposable culture.

Stephanie Jaffe Werner’s Mary Jane (fig. 55) is a

Red Stalactite recalls another piggish childhood

play on words. Her candy-encased dolls, often

trick involving gum—the tendency to stick it

with slyly suggestive titles, embrace the popular

under furniture or in other inappropriate places,

candy brand’s iconic stature, “unwrapping and

and the preserved gum cone, glowing with

rewrapping them to reveal their subliminal

artificial dyes, conjures up aching childhood

messages and double entendres.” 18 Her vision of

jaws. The perfect geometry of the cone, an

childhood has been literally wrapped in sweets.

upside-down dunce cap, gives the work its formal sophistication. But the geometry is undercut by a

Becca Albee’s site-specific installation

compulsion “to imagine a seated body with which

incorporates a large hidden ball, “stuck” under

this red, masticated mass is somehow associated,

the museum’s staircase, 2007 (fig. 1) references

flowing like menstrual blood or attached as a

childhood toys cast away or lost, like a balloon

large scaly tail or weird phallus.”17 The piece also

caught in a tree. The ball is covered with bright

presents the vivid contrast between the forms of

frostings, derived from popular designs for

salty “natural” stalactites and sweet, artificially

children’s birthday cakes, which streak across the

created ones.

gallery floor. Sprinkles, candy toppings,

11

and childhood characters in frosting litter

Masaaki Sato’s Sato Newstand No. 93 (Snickers),

the trail, suggesting disappointment in the

2005-2006 (fig. 48) presents candy as a distinctly

ephemeral nature of childhood celebrations.19

urban accessory, although Sato has cropped out

Similarly, Julie Allen’s Raspberry Cake, 2003

the surrounding cityscape in order to focus the

(fig. 2), while beautiful in its abstraction, also

viewer’s attention. His large-scale canvases are

exudes discontent. Created with empty balloons,

true contemporary still life. People are absent,

it connotes the “deflating” disappointment

“relegated to the covers of magazines, where

that accompanies celebrations that don’t meet

they usually appear in half-length.”

anticipated expectations.

Ironically, the shapely, beautiful people on the

21

fashion covers featured in the top half of the Consumption, Women, and Society

canvas act as a visual rebuke to the desire to consume the caloric candy featured below.

The Pop Art Movement’s critique of American

Still, Sato’s candy is a beacon of colorful

consumerism has been a subject that

consumer comfort in a drab city. A Snickers

contemporary artists have embraced and candy

bar becomes an international symbol for

provides a perfect medium for the dissection of

understanding. In Gum, 2005 (fig. 17),

consumerist culture. Self-taught artist Brendan

Cindy Craig uses multiple layers of watercolor

O’Connell’s Foraging, Aisle 13, 2007 (fig. 46)

to recreate the vibrant Technicolor of the candy

questions the splendor of quantity in modern

aisle. Her interest in consumer culture and the

“big box” suburban retailing, and the negative

role women play in consumption is central to her

effects of the overwhelming choice available to

selection of images. Craig’s paintings engage

the American consumer that can lead to feelings

in a beautiful realism that subtly comments on

of alienation. His “interiors and various products

the mechanisms of consumerism.

22

have a wonderfully rancid cheeriness about them that Edvard Munch might have understood. 20

Ruth Grace Jervis’ Wedding Cake Two, 2004

John Baeder’s Sanchez Ice Cream, 2002 (fig.

(fig. 38) is an example of the artist’s embrace

5) is one of the artist’s series of watercolors

of traditional realism but her cakes function as

that depict a local, neighborhood-based

metaphor. Lavishly frosted, the Jervis wedding

commercialism. The scale of selling is reversed.

cakes relate to a generalized idea of marriage,

Rather than alienation, the artist conjures the

rather than to any one specific event in time. 23

memory of childhood anticipation.

The stark black velvety backgrounds and curled ribbons Jervis tucks into the corners of her

12

canvases historicize her confections and underline

sweets and consumerism. His alluring chocolates

their value, as those confections are presented

are actually created from global currency.

on the same background used for precious jewels.

But the work is ironic—“the candy cannot be

The deeply solemn, unsmiling oval portrait of

eaten, and the viewer is left to ponder tiny

a lone woman adds a mysterious but distinctly

mummy like mysteries.”

downbeat element to the canvas, suggesting that

2001 (fig. 7) links illness and the costs of

a woman’s wedding day may also represent

consumerism. As societal battles over the cost

the death of individuality, a sacrificial offering up

and availability of AIDS medications continue

of self—the bride may be literally consumed.

to escalate, Benes presents an array of the

24

Benes’ Petits Fours,

most tempting medical treats—they are literally Kirsten Hassenfeld’s Sweet Nothing, 2005 (fig.

lifesaving. In contrast to Benes’ pretty but

35) offers a seemingly more hopeful view of

chilling petit fours, Bruce Helander’s Dandy

marriage. Her confection literally glows from

Candy-Cane Man, 2007 (fig. 36) is a charming

within, although the title of the piece suggests

and affectionate homage to late nineteenth-

that love may be illusory. Her fanciful designs,

century consumerism. The collage, made from

influenced by traditional Victorian craftwork, are

vintage candy advertisements, includes a dapper

created out of paper, which gives them an added

gentleman, chocolates bursting from frock coat,

delicacy. Like cakes and love, their presence

who could easily be a Victorian prototype for

may be temporary—easily destroyed by rough

Dahl’s iconic Willie Wonka. One advertisement

handling. Orly Cogan’s art utilizes needlework,

proudly declares, “We Are Rapidly Coming Into an

traditionally done by women, to explore

Era of Finest Quality Candy,” a perfect description

the dichotomy of women’s roles in society.

of Gilded Age industrial growth and its sparkling

In Cupcake Girl, 2005 (fig. 12), Cogan combines

promise of seemingly unlimited consumer choice.

vintage fabric with hand stitching to create a startling image of a young woman devouring

On a more downbeat note, Jessica Schwind’s

“Hostess” cupcakes. The piece challenges

Melt series (fig. 49 and 50) is part of her ongoing

traditional iconography and draws the viewer to

exploration of holiday-themed objects that have

consider ideas of domesticity, hospitality,

outlived their moments. Schwind’s chocolate

and what is polite or “refined” presentation.

bunnies, in varying stages of disintegration, mutely appeal to the viewer for empathy and

Barton Lidice Benes’ Sampler , 2002 (fig. 6)

become a form of contemporary memento

makes ominously explicit the link between

mori. Similar to the themes in Becca Albee’s

13

and Julie Allen’s work, Schwind finds that

to the peasants, “Let them eat candy!”

these holiday objects often convey a false

Cotton’s work is deeply influenced by the work

hope of a season that can be filled with stress

of the nineteenth-century French painter William-

and disappointment. 25 Her bunnies are more

Adolphe Bouguereau and Cotton’s “infatuation

sad than funny. Unconsumed, they are also

with the seductive lure of candy provides a

unconsummated, having failed to fulfill their

perfect complement to his obsession with the

purpose as they deteriorate uneaten.

legacy of academic nudes.”

26

Cotton is a polished

painter, giving his work a commercial glossy While Schwind’s work presumes the inevitable

sheen that stylistically has much in common

decay of all foodstuffs, Melissa Martens’

with early twentieth-century illustrators.

Marshmallows in their Natural Habitat, 2007

As in Jervis’ Wedding Cake Two, Cotton gives

(fig. 41) challenges that idea. Her diorama

his work a neutral dark background intended

incorporates the multicolor marshmallow chicks

to historicize and monumentalize his work.

much celebrated on numerous websites for their

But for all the suggestiveness of the painting

long shelf life. Marshmallows in their Natural

and the artist’s bravura technique, the girl’s

Habitat simultaneously questions and celebrates

wild candy headdress makes her a slightly comic

archetypal museum displays. Her work references

figure, easily mocking desire.

Dime Museums, the late nineteenth-century institutions for the working classes that combined

Peter Anton takes the same regal sensuality

entertainment and education, and salutes the

presented by Candy Curls and imbues it in

natural history diorama tradition in American

enormous and glossy mouthwatering candies

natural history museums. The artist comments

(fig. 4). These are candies literally fit for a king.

on the Victorian impulse to catalogue and collect

Forrest Gump may have said, “Life is like a box of

everyday objects as well as the attempts by

chocolates, you never know what you are going to

museums to represent different perspectives on

get,” but Anton’s wall sculptures do not offer any

different cultures.

doubt. His work promises ultimate fulfillment and the temptation to grab all that life has to offer.

Sweet Decadence

“While most [of his] candies are left pristine, others are ravaged, showing evidence of being

14

In Candy Curls, 2005 (fig. 15) Will Cotton has

bitten or pinched to reveal tantalizing centers,”

created a sensual Marie-Antoinette figure who

which makes them all the more alluring. 27

looks as though she may well have declared

Anton’s candy boxes live in a world of fantasy in

which the viewers are rendered Lilliputian. In his

our expectations of a gun’s black, heavy metal

work desire outstrips the capability to consume.

qualities and its male associations.”

Candy appreciated for its formal properties,

of her “Approximations” Graham has ironically

is a frequent subject for still life and it is also

painted the case surrounding her guns a pale

frequently used as an artistic metaphor for

pink, emphasizing the feminine, confection-like

consumption, childhood or decadence. Some

softness of her material—easily damaged by

artists have used candy to explore far-flung ideas,

a drop of water. Morgan Bulkeley’s Woodcock

from religion to violence. Peter Anton’s work is

and Juicy Fruit, 2003 (fig. 9) presents a surreal

an affirmation and an embrace of worldly desires

image of violent battle as a brand of popular

but Patricia Nix’s Joystick, 2007 (fig. 45) serves

chewing gum seemingly becomes a source

as both an antidote and a reaffirmation of candy

for contention between huge, fierce birds and

as a symbol of decadence. Her long and narrow

a primitive people wielding bow-and-arrows.

29

In several

wall constructions that she calls “icons,” are made on a human scale that combines the sacred

Most of the art in I WANT Candy is beautifully

and the profane. The entire surface of Joystick

“sugar coated” to the eye, although other

is encrusted in tiny silver nonpareils studded

works are more confrontational, even actively

with peppermints and found jewel-like objects.

unpleasant. When candy is depicted in art, the

The combination of materials and the title of

art is usually about longing need. Often this

the piece make implicit the connection between

yearning is thwarted or unfulfilled in some subtle

sweets and the sublime. Nix’s assemblages are

way. It is this longing—the Proustian tinge

influenced by the work of Joseph Cornell and her

of nostalgic regret—which gives much of the art

borrowing of religious iconography underscores “a

in the exhibition its impact. French author

kind of childish mysticism” that Nix has morphed

Simone de Beauvoir once described this craving

into the joie de vivre found in her sculptures. 28

for sweets, reflecting on her childhood:

Susan Graham’s Sugar Approximation—Beretta

I would stand transfixed before the windows

92S Pistol, 2007 (fig. 33) presents the viewer

of the confectioners’ shops, fascinated by the

with another startling juxtaposition of form and

luminous sparkle of candied fruits, the cloudy

content. Graham’s delicate but dangerous spun-

lustre of jellies, the kaleidoscope inflorescence

sugar guns have a sweetness that “effectively

of acidulated fruitdrops—red, green, orange,

offsets the potential of such killing machines. In

violet: I coveted the colors themselves

this context the substitution of spun sugar upsets

as much as the pleasure they promised me.

15

Candy allures, but it also represents a danger when transformed into rampant consumerism,

1. Nicolai Cikovsky, Raphaelle Peale Still Lifes (National Gallery of Art, 1988), 34.

gluttony, or violence. Throughout history, sugar—

2. Ibid., 33.

white and glistening—has been both coveted and

3. Paul LeBaron Thiebaud, Wayne Thiebaud Pastels: 1960-2000 (Campbell-Thiebaud Gallery, 2000),3.

reviled, the source of wealth and wars.

Surely, the source of temptation in a parable of a modern day Adam and Eve would be now a candied apple—the original deemed too nutritious and too virtuous. Fulfilling the “sweet tooth yearning of the younger set without the tummy ache after effects” was the original marketing description for the popular board game Candyland, and it may also be the best way to describe the continued visual consumption of the sweet stuff in American art. 30

4. Stephen A. Nash and Adam Gopnik, Wayne Thiebaud: A Paintings Retrospective (Thames & Hudson, 2000), 55.

5. Ted Mann, “Guggenheim Magazine—Recent Acquisitions,” Guggenheim Museum, http://www.guggenheimcollection. org/site/artist_work_md_200602_ 01.html.

6. Cara Wood Ginder, “Statement,” Artist’s Website, http://www.carawoodginder.com/ statement.htmlAritst’s statement.

7. Bruce Glaser. Audrey Flack: The Gray Border Series (Louis Meisel Gallery, 1976), 2.

8. Beverly Shipko, e-mail message to the author, March 21, 2007.

9. Michael Duncan, “Daniel Douke: Surface Tension,” in Daniel Douke: Endless Instant, ed. Julie Joyce. (Luck Man Gallery, California State University, 2006), 34.

10. Ibid, 37.

16. Moukhtar Kocache, “Give and Take Your Breath Away” in Mary Magsamen & Stephan Hillerbrand, (Contemporary Art Center of Virginia, 2006), 5.

17. Michaël Amy, “John Salvest at Morgan Lehman,” Art in America, January 2007, 140.

18. Stephanie Jaffe Werner, email message to the author, December 26, 2006.

19. Becca Albee, email message to the author, March 27, 2007.

20. Joe Fyfe, “ Brendan O’Connell at Morgan Lehman,” Art in America, October 2006, 199.

21. Michael Amy, Masaaki Sato: An Introduction,” 123soho, http://www.123soho.com/artists/ featured/f_artist_index_artist. phtml?artnum =artidv00554.

22. Leslie Jones, Liquid Los Angeles: Currents of Contemporary Watercolor Painting (Pasadena Museum of California, 2005).

23. Peter Frank, Ruth Grace Jervis New Paintings 2001-2005 (Hunsaker/Schlesinger Fine Art, 2005), 9.

24. Tanguy, Sweet Tooth, 43.

25. Jessica Schwind, email message to the author, March 12, 2007.

11. Benjamin Genocchio, “Fattening Goodies in All Their Sugary Glory,” New York Times, April 8, 2007, Westchester Section.

26. Robert Rosenblum, Will Cotton (Michael Kohn Gallery, 2005), 9.

12. Sarah Tanguy, Sweet Tooth (COPIA: The American Center for Wine, Food & the Arts, 2002), 18.

28. Carol Diehl. Patricia Nix: Alters and Icons (Dillon Gallery, 1997), 2.

13. Trevor Fairbrother, Janet Fish (DC Moore Gallery, 2007), 8.

29. Tanguy, Sweet Tooth, 95.

27. Tanguy, Sweet Tooth, 12.

30. Rosenblum, Will Cotton, 8.

14. Robert G. Edelman. The Food Show - The Hungry Eye: Is it Insatiable? (Chelsea Art Museum, 2006).

15. Brooks Barrie, Red Grooms (Grounds for Sculpture, 2000), 12.

16

Exhibition Images

BECCA ALBEE Untitled (frosting installation), 2007 Mixed media dimensions variable Collection of the artist

JULIE ALLEN Raspberry Cake, 2003 Balloons and thread 9 ∞ x 5 x 9 ∞ in.

Courtesy of McKenzie Fine Art, Inc.

18

Figures 1, 2

JULIE ALLEN Black Forest Cake, 2005 Silk, thread, vinyl, marbles, liquid vinyl 2 ∞ x 10 x 10 in.

Courtesy of McKenzie Fine Art, Inc.

PETER ANTON Grand Sweetheart Assortment, 2007 Mixed media 57 x 56 x 6 in.

Collection of the artist

Figures 3, 4

19

JOHN BAEDER Sanchez Ice Cream, 2002 Watercolor on paper 13 x 19 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

BARTON LIDICE BENES Sampler, 2002 Shredded money 11 x 13 ∞ x 1 ∞ in.

Loan courtesy Lennon, Weinberg, Inc., New York, NY

20

Figures 5, 6

BARTON LIDICE BENES Petits Fours, 2002 Glass cake stand, doily, and AIDS medication Edition of 3, 11 x 13 x 13 in.

Loan courtesy Lennon, Weinberg, Inc., New York, NY

MINDY BEST Dentyne-ism #95: “Picking a scab may leave a scar, but it sure is fun”, 2006 Metallic C-print edition of 3 20 x 30 in.

Collection of the artist

Figures 7, 8

21

Morgan Bulkeley Woodcock and Juicy Fruit, 2003 Oil on carved sugar maple 12 x 15 ∞ in.

Courtesy of the Howard Yezerski Gallery

Neil Christensen Strawberries, Cupcake, Coke, and Cherries, 2002 Oil on panel 16 x 20 in.

Collection of Dan and Lindsay Augustyn, Lincoln, Nebraska.

22

Figures 9, 10

Orly Cogan Confections, 2006-2007 Mixed media needlework dimensions variable Courtesy of the artist

Orly Cogan Cupcake Girl, 2005 Hand stitched embroidery and paint on vintage fabric 27 x 14 in.

Courtesy of the artist (detail) Orly Cogan Confections, 2006-2007

Figures 11, detail, 12

23

Sharon Core Candy Counter “1969”, 2004 Digital C-Print 47 x 36 in.

Courtesy of the artist

Sharon Core Various Cakes, 2004 Digital C-Print 25 x 23 in.

Courtesy of the artist

24

Figures 13, 14

Will Cotton Candy Curls, 2005 Oil on linen 34 x 24 in.

Collection of Danny First, Courtesy of the Michael Kohn Gallery

Will Cotton Trailer,1998 Oil on linen 59 x 116 in.

Courtesy of the artist and Mary Boone Gallery

Figures 15, 16

25

Cindy Craig Gum, 2005 Watercolor on paper 22 x 60 in.

Courtesy of Hunsaker/ Schlesinger Fine Art

James Del Grosso Big Kiss, 2007 Oil on canvas 32 x 32 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

26

Figures 17, 18

Marylyn Dintenfass Good & Plenty: Ultra Blue, 2005 Oil on panel 48 x 48 in.

Courtesy of Babcock Galleries

Dan Douke Swear in Pink, 2004 Acrylic on canvas 24 x 24 in.

Courtesy of the artist

Figures 19, 20

27

Dan Douke Friends, 2000 Acrylic on canvas 15 x 8 3/4 x 3 1/2 in.

Courtesy of the artist

Travis Conrad Erion Rock Candy, 2006 Oil on canvas 16 x 8 in.

Courtesy of the artist

28

Figures 21, 22

Emily Eveleth Inverse, 2006 Oil on paper 20 1/2 x 17 1/4 in.

Courtesy of the Howard Yezerski Gallery

Emily Eveleth Veil, 2002 Oil on canvas 22 x 20 in.

Courtesy of the Howard Yezerski Gallery

Figures 23, 24

29

Janet Fish Ice Cream Sundae, 2004 Oil on canvas 50 x 60 in.

Courtesy DC Moore Gallery, New York Art © Janet Fish/ Licensed by VAGA, New York, NY

Janet Fish Lollipops, 1996 Watercolor on paper 30 x 23 in.

Courtesy DC Moore Gallery, New York Art © Janet Fish/ Licensed by VAGA, New York, NY

30

Figures 25, 26

Audrey Flack Hers (Hershey Kisses), 1977 Acrylic on board 16 x 23 in.

Courtesy of Louis K. Meisel Gallery

Figure 27

31

Cara Wood Ginder Triple Decker Ice Cream Cone, 2006 Oil and acrylic on wood 10 x 8 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Cara Wood Ginder Popsicle, 2006 Oil and acrylic on wood 10 x 8 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

32

Figures 28, 29

Ralph Goings Chocolate Pie, n.d.

Ralph Goings Yellow Pie, n.d.

Watercolor and gouache on board 3 x 5 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Watercolor and gouache on board 3 x 5 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Ralph Goings Napkins Donut, n.d.

Watercolor and gouache on board 4 1/2 x 5 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Figures 30, 31, 32

33

Susan Graham Sugar Approximation— Beretta 92S Pistol, 2007 Sugar, egg whites, resin, wire, vitrine 6 x 12 x 8 in.

Courtesy the artist and Schroeder Romero, New York

Red Grooms Bubble Gum, 2001 Enamel on epoxy 37 x 47 x 8 in.

Courtesy of Marlborough Gallery © Red Grooms/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York

34

Figures 33, 34

Kirsten Hassenfeld Sweet Nothing, 2005 Paper with Mixed Media Collection of Heather and Tony Podesta

Figure 35

35

Bruce Helander Dandy Candy-Cane Man, 2007 Paper collage and found material on museum board with gouache 9 x 12 in.

Courtesy of the artist

36

Figure 36

Richard Hickam Blueberry Royal, 2000 Oil on canvas 11 ∞ x 12 ∞ in.

Courtesy of the Allan Stone Gallery

Figure 37

37

Zane Lewis Wonka’s Chocolate Waterfall, 2006 Mixed Media 16 x 18 ∞ x 2 ∞ in.

Courtesy of Claudia and Ari Kandel

Ruth Grace JErvis Wedding Cake Two, 2004 Oil on Canvas 54 x 42 in.

Courtesy of Hunsaker/ Schlesinger Fine Art

Mary Magsamen and Stephan Hillerbrand air-hunger (bathroom), 2003 Video Courtesy of the artists

38

Figures 38, 39, 40

Melissa Martens, Multicultural Marshmallow Museum Marshmallows in Their Natural Habitat, 2007 Marshmallows, foam, found objects 17 x 5 1/4 x 20 1/2 in.

Collection of the artist

Kim Mendenhall 6 Desserts for Wayne, 2004 Oil on linen 36 1/8 x 53 5/8 in.

Courtesy of the Louis K. Meisel Gallery

Figures 41, 42

39

Don Nice Tootsie Pops, 1973 Watercolor on paper 24 x 36 1/4 in.

Courtesy of Babcock Galleries

Don Nice Caramel, 1992 Watercolor on paper 15 x 22 in.

Courtesy of Babcock Galleries

40

Figures 43, 44

Patricia Nix Joystick, 2007 Mixed media 102 x 5 in.

Courtesy of the artist

(detail) Patricia Nix Joystick, 2007

Figure 45, detail

41

Brendan O’Connell Foraging, Aisle 13, 2007 Acrylic on panel 60 x 40 in.

Courtesy of the artist and Morgan Lehman Gallery

42

Figure 46

John Salvest Red Stalactite, 2006 Wood, steel, chewed gum 30 x 14 x 14 in.

Courtesy of the artist and Morgan Lehman Gallery

Masaaki Sato Sato Newsstand No. 93 (Snickers), 2005 - 2006 Oil on canvas 40 x 48 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Figures 47, 48

43

Jessica Schwind Melt, IV, 2005 C-Print 20 x 26 in.

Collection of the artist

Jessica Schwind Melt, VI, 2005 C-Print 20 x 26 in.

Collection of the artist

44

Figure 49, 50

Beverly Shipko Bonnie’s Carrot Cake, 2006 Oil on canvas, 4 panels 33 x 41 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

Figure 51

45

Beverly Shipko Heart Shaped Box of Chocolates, 2007 Oil on canvas 8 x 10 in.

Courtesy of the artist and OK Harris Works of Art

Tjalf Sparnaay Apple Pie, 2005 Oil on canvas 11 3/4 x 15 3/4 in.

Courtesy of OK Harris Works of Art

46

Figures 52, 53

Wayne Thiebaud Italian Desserts, 1986 Pastel over soft-ground etching Image: 16 x 20 in.

Sheet: 22 1/4 x 24 1/4 in.

Courtesy Allan Stone Gallery Art Š Wayne Thiebaud/ Licensed by VAGA, New York, NY

Figure 54

47

Stephanie Jaffe Werner Mary Jane, 2006 Mixed media 27 ∞ x 17 x 3 ∞ in.

Courtesy of the artist

48

Figure 55

Lenders to the Exhibition

Allan Stone Gallery, New York, NY

Louis K. Meisel Gallery, New York, NY

Becca Albee

Mary Magsamen and Stephan Hillerbrand

Peter Anton

Marlborough Gallery, New York, NY

Dan and Lindsay Augustyn

Melissa Martens

Babcock Galleries, New York, NY

Mary Boone Gallery, New York, NY

Mindy Best

McKenzie Fine Art, Inc., New York, NY

Orly Cogan

Michael Kohn Gallery, Los Angles, CA

Sharon Core

Morgan Lehman Gallery, New York, NY

Will Cotton

Patricia Nix

DC Moore Gallery, New York, NY

Private Collections

Dan Douke

Brendan O’Connell

Travis Conrad Erion

OK Harris Works of Art, New York, NY

Danny First

Heather and Tony Podesta

Susan Graham

John Salvest

Bruce Helander

Schroeder Romero, New York, NY

Howard Yezerski Gallery, Boston, MA

Jessica Schwind

Hunsaker/Schlesinger Fine Art, Santa Monica, CA

Beverly Shipko

Claudia and Ari Kandel

Stephanie Jaffe Werner

Lennon, Weinberg, Inc., New York, NY

49

Acknowledgements

I WANT Candy: The Sweet Stuff in American Art would not have become a reality without the help of a great many people. I would like to express my gratitude for their support and for their assistance in developing the exhibition framework, securing loans, and providing images.

At the Hudson River Museum, Michael Botwinick, Director, has provided encouragement since I initially proposed the exhibition two years ago. In addition to suggesting several artists, I am grateful to Jean-Paul Maitinsky, Assistant Director, Exhibitions and Programs, for his advice and infectious enthusiasm, which have helped make the most of this project. Laura L. Vookles, Chief Curator of Collections, was also generous with her time and offered a number of valuable editorial insights.

I would particularly like to thank Linda Locke, Director of Public Relations, for carefully overseeing the production of the catalogue and for her close attention to the details of the editing process.

Erica Blumenfeld, Registrar has been my partner in this undertaking. Using her considerable organizational skills, she thoughtfully handled the many details and unexpected challenges associated with an exhibition of this scope.

James Monroe has continued his fruitful relationship with the museum, creating a charming graphic design for the catalogue. Bo Joseph, Ethan Karp, Ivan Karp, Vivian Kiechel, Heidi Lange, and Sally Morgan Oberbeck were kind in providing helpful expertise. Alexis Dunfee, Gloria Garrett, Lyle Gray, Valerie McKenzie, Louis Meisel, Amanda Moon, Tara Reddi, Lora Schlesinger, Lisa Schroeder, Claudia Stone, and Amy Yee all worked with the museum staff to secure loans for the project.

I owe them my gratitude. Finally, I would like to thank A.J. Minogue and Penelope Fritzer for their unstinting love and advice while I was developing this exhibition.

Bartholomew F. Bland

Melissa Martens, Multicultural Marshmallow Museum Marshmallows in Their Natural Habitat (Proposal Rendering), 2006

50

FRONT COVER Will Cotton Candy Curls, 2005 Oil on linen 34 x 24 in.

Collection of Danny First, Courtesy of the Michael Kohn Gallery BACK COVER MINDY BEST Dentyne-ism #95: “Picking a scab may leave a scar, but it sure is fun”, 2006 Metallic C-print edition of 3 20 x 30 in.

Collection of the artist