The Return of Op: With Two Major Survey Shows on Op Art Running Almost Concurrently in Europe and the United States, We Asked Contributing Editor David Rimanelli and Art Historian Sarah K. Rich to Assess the Exhibitions and Reflect on the Resurgence of Interest In-And Contemporary Resonance Of-This Long-Moribund Movement

By Rimanelli, David; Rich, Sarah K. | Artforum International, May 2007 | Go to article overview

The Return of Op: With Two Major Survey Shows on Op Art Running Almost Concurrently in Europe and the United States, We Asked Contributing Editor David Rimanelli and Art Historian Sarah K. Rich to Assess the Exhibitions and Reflect on the Resurgence of Interest In-And Contemporary Resonance Of-This Long-Moribund Movement


Rimanelli, David, Rich, Sarah K., Artforum International


Beautiful Loser: Op Art Revisited

SO WHY OP NOW? Some forty years after the Museum of Modern Art, New York, introduced Op art to the American public with its landmark 1965 exhibition "The Responsive Eye," two museums have mounted historical shows looking back: "Optic Nerve: Perceptual Art of the 1960s" at the Columbus Museum of Art in Columbus, Ohio (through June 17); and "Op Art" at the Schirn Kunsthalle, Frankfurt (through May 20). Both are ambitious curatorial efforts, distinct in certain relative emphases, and for that very reason providing in tandem an unusually rich perspective on a movement consigned by pretty much everyone to the dustbin of art history. Yet such impressive attentiveness only serves to raise the stakes with respect to the question, Why should we be looking at this midcentury anachronism again? What are we supposed to learn? The cynic no doubt wonders whether all those museum curators, academics, and artists who have been mining the '60s for good material finally found the well dried up--meaning, Op is all that's left to "rediscover." But then, looking again with a more self-conscious eye, one wonders if we might discover something more about ourselves if we consider Op--and, more specifically, "The Responsive Eye"--less in light of its art than of the cultural phenomena surrounding it. After all, the exhibition was in a sense the first contemporary art blockbuster: Remember the lines around the block to get in; the readymade "controversy" regarding Op's aesthetic viability; the media craze, complete with a documentary by first-time filmmaker Brian De Palma; the unprecedented public embrace of Op, attended by the rapacious commodification and virtually instantaneous ubiquity of the look; the mindless fun to be had! Everything contemporary art curators today wish their shows could be. (It is no denigration to curators that they desire more than a day in the sun, or that, in our preponderantly post-Warholian artistic weltanschauung, curators no less than artists and starlets think that fifteen minutes are no longer enough.) One explanation for this sudden reappearance of Op, in other words, is that it is a past moment that all too clearly anticipates our present, distinguished by the heretofore unimaginable mainstreaming of contemporary art, its vastly increased visibility to the general public, the star status of more artists than ever, the art world's attraction for the fashion and glamour press, and the fascination with money, so much money.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Such was, at least, my initial thinking. Pressed on the subject of Op art before seeing these shows, I would probably have passively sided with Clement Greenberg, who dismissed Op as yet another misshapen species of "Novelty art" or "Good Design"--memorable put-downs that he also directed at most art of the '60s, whether Pop or Minimalism or myriad other manifestations of retrograde or plain phony aesthetic phenomena. (Greenberg either missed "The Responsive Eye" or deemed it beneath his notice; I can find no reference to it in his published writings.) But now I am compelled to reconsider the Op-is-junk bias. Op, regardless of its numerous contemporaneous detractors and of the dim fate usually accorded it by art history, is, in its best moments, a movement of keen visual, intellectual, and historical interest. That is what makes both the Columbus and Frankfurt excavations terrific: They restore Op as a subject of genuine fascination; they might even rescue forgotten careers, e.g., those of Carlos Cruz-Diez, Wojciech Fangor, Wolfgang Ludwig, Jesus-Rafael Soto, Julian Stanczak. Sure, some of this work in disparate mediums does look like junk, but some of it looks really hot. In Columbus, Bridget Riley's Current, 1964, which was featured on the cover of the "Responsive Eye" catalogue, still stands out as an extraordinary (and extraordinarily bizarre) achievement, a work of tightly controlled formal invention--"Modernist painting," really, despite Greenberg's indifference--and, notwithstanding Riley's protests to the contrary, one that shimmers and shivers torturously, an event no less than an object.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Return of Op: With Two Major Survey Shows on Op Art Running Almost Concurrently in Europe and the United States, We Asked Contributing Editor David Rimanelli and Art Historian Sarah K. Rich to Assess the Exhibitions and Reflect on the Resurgence of Interest In-And Contemporary Resonance Of-This Long-Moribund Movement
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.