Picabia and His Influence on American Art, 1913-17

Jan Thompson

Art Journal, Vol. 39, No. 1. (Autumn, 1979), pp. 14-21.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3249%28197923%2939%3A1%3C14%3APAHIOA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-8

Art Journal is currently published by College Art Association.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/caa.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academicjournals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.orgSun Sep 16 05:49:03 2007

Picabia and His Influence on American Art, 191 3-1 7 JAN THOMPSON

It has been stated that Picabia was a seminal influence upon arrival in New York. They express the spirit of New York as I feel

American art and artists during the decade after the Armory it, and the crowded streets of your city as I feel them, their

Show. The intention here is directly to examine Picabia's influ- surging, their unrest, their commercialism, and their atmospheric

ence in terms of two distinct phases, one beginning in 1913 and charm.2

the second in 1915, and in terms of the specific connections which can be made between works by Picabia exhibited in the United States and works by American painters who most likely saw those paintings.'

The first phase of Picabia's influence coincides with his 1913 visit to New York to attend the Armory Show. As the only foreign artist to make the trip to America, Picabia was imme- diately "taken up" by the press, which attempted to wring from him some comprehensible key for decoding the mysterious works in the show. The influence Picabia exerted at this time seems to have been spread primarily through his theories-in some cases as translated by baffled newspapermen, and in other cases as presented in the pages of Stieglitz's Camera Work-rather than through his art directly. Welcoming inter- views as a means of disseminating his observations, Picabia seems to have succeeded, as echoes of his concepts surfaced in contemporary interviews with other American artists.

Because of his availability during the Armory Show's run, Picabia received more derision for his use of Cubist form than did Picasso or Braque. But he was not unaware of the publicity value inherent in taking New York by storm. Heavy advance publicity for the Armory Show had generated an intense antic- ipation. Into this arena stepped Picabia, as his own best public relations man. A visible, vocal representative of the modern blasphemies hanging in the 69th Regiment Armory, Picabia gave interviews, made sketches for New York newspapers to publish along with articles about him, and uttered provocative, quotable assertions.

Inflammatory statements issued by orthodox academicians seemed to focus even more attention on Picabia. Significant and perhaps useful was damnation by Kenyon Cox, who called upon the higher authority of the dictionary in a March, 1913 issue of Harper's Weekly, in which he ascertained that:

The real meaning of this Cubist movement is.. . total destruction of the art of painting-that art of which the dictionary definition is 'the art of representing by means of figures and colors applied on a surface, objects presented to the eye or to the imagination'!

Impressed by the raw vitality of the American city, the blatant modernity and visible industrial progressiveness, Picabia at- tuned himself immediately to the excitement of the skyscraper environment. Manhattan had become the focus and paradigm for urban progress during the opening decades of the 20th century, not only for America, but for Europe as well. Picabia believed that Americans would welcome the new art since they had adopted advanced technologies:

Within a month of his arrival, Picabia had met Stieglitz, who was immediately charmed by the artist and his wife. Picabia, for his part, sensed kindred spirits in Stieglitz and his coterie. As a member of this group, Picabia regularly frequented 291 and parties given by Mabel Dodge, established close relation- ships which resulted in mutual influences, and contributed a new infusion of the latest European ideas to the artists around Stieglitz.

At the Armory Show, Picabia exhibited four paintings that employed the superficial vocabulary of Cubism, as in his Procession, Seville (private collection, Paris), which encouraged a New York Times critic to label him "the Cuban who outcubed the Cubists." Picabia viewed these paintings as "psychological studies" in which the abstraction resided solely in the forms. Content remains within the Symbolist tradition, as he sub- scribed to a theory of correspondences that invested visual components with musical and psychological equivalents.

While the Armory Show was topical news, Picabia continued to be singled out for attention, his works appearing in various publications. Subscribers to Camera Work could see his Dance at the Source (Philadelphia Museum of Art) reproduced in that periodical. Interviewers from The New York Times and the New

Because of your extreme modernity, he said, . . . you should quickly understand the studies which I have made since my

Fig. 1. "A Post-Cubist's lmpressionsof New York." New York Tribune. March 9, 191 3, part 11. p. 1.

ART JOURNAL, XXXIX/1

7 ; .I I

1 3'1

- \ 7

1 * ' '

J

ar P 7 h- 'h -Y

Fig. 2. Francis P~cab~a. Dance at the Source, 191 2. Collection Philadelphia I

Museum of Art.

Fig. 3. Arthur 0. Davies. Interformed. ca. 191 5. oil on canvas. 20 X 14". Collection Graham Gallery, New York.

York Tribune not only showed black-and-white illustrations of Picabia's Armory Show paintings, but also works especially created for the Tribune, captioned "the first 'post-impression- istic' pictures of New York ever made" (Fig. 1). The accompa- nying article asserted that Picabia planned to continue his visit to New York longer because " . . . he finds here so many men and women who are seriously interested in the theories, the practice and the aims of the different modern painters." And concluding the article, the interviewer noted: "What pleases M.

Fig. 4. Francis Picabia, Catch as Catch Can, 191 3, oil on canvas, 39% x 32%. Philadelphia Museum of Art. Arensberg Collection.

Picabia most in this city i s the sincerity of the interest in the modern movement evinced by the men and women he meets here."3 Clearly, Picabia himself felt that his theories were find- ing a rapt audience.

Within two days of the Armory Show's closing, Picabia was once more in the public eye, this time at Stieglitz's gallery, for which Picabia prepared a series of watercolor studies recording his sensations prompted by the New York milieu. These paint- ings, while frequently couched in the form of his previous Cubist works, state a new formal and thematic interest, and move in hitherto unexplored directions.

In Picabia's introduction to the catalog of his show at 291, he addressed the concept of art as a means of communication, contrasting objective and subjective forms, and the possibility of viewer rapport with abstraction in terms of parallels with musical language. In discussing the impressions of the city and their reproduction in paint, Picabia noted: "I improvise my pictures as a musician improvises music."

Picabia's painting and verbal statements were repeatedly available to the American public during his first visit to New York, and the repercussions of that event continued through his second visit. The preface of the 291 catalog was quoted extensively in urban newspapers throughout the country. Cam- era Work published a special June, 1913 issue exposing Picabia's attitudes about contemporary art to the public. And Arthur Jerome Eddy, who had bought Picabia's Dance at the Source (Fig. 2) out of the Armory Show, published his Cubists and Post-Impressionism in 1914, which offered a further examina- tion of current theories predominant in avant-garde groups. In Eddy's introduction to the new movements, the author repeat- edly relied on Picabia's ideas to enable him to explain the recent art. Calling on the parallels between music and art that

FALL 1979 15

Picabia stated in each of his interviews, Eddy attempted to translate for his American audience the expressive abstractions of contemporary European artists. Eddy's book served to keep Picabia and his ideas in the spotlight and to transmit those ideas to a newly maturing group of American artists, eager to be current in matters of European art.

Evidence of Picabia's influence can be found in the radical change of style which occurred after 1913 in the paintings of Arthur B. Davies, whose earlier ethereal nudes in foggy land- scapes were transformed into dancers which recall those Picabia exhibited at the Armory Show (for example, Davies' Dancers, Detroit Institute of Arts). Both painters retain suggestions of figural form, although Davies makes the figures significantly more obvious. The combination of a traditional subdued Cubist palette with brighter colors added in accented areas under- scores Picabia as source, as Picabia's "cubistic" paintings regu- larly introduced colors other than the usual monochrome.

It i s likely that Davies also saw Picabia's paintings exhibited later at 291 in January, 1915. Davies' Interformed (Fig. 3) of 1915 echoes passages of flat interlocking and superimposed bands visible in Picabia's Catch as Catch Can (Fig. 4).

The meeting of Picabia and Marius De Zayas in New York during 1913 established an initial point of departure for Pica- bia's subsequent influence upon other American artists. A rich interchange occurred between the artist and the caricaturist, which was encouraged by De Zayas' visit to Picabia in Paris during the spring of 1914. De Zayas was instrumental in bringing Picabia's newest canvases back to New York with him for the January, 1915 show at 291.

De Zayas' own caricatures were undoubtedly influenced by conversations with Picabia. The Francis Picabia (Fig. 5) from Camera Work (1914, no. 46) illustrates a use of abstract geo- metric shapes and superimposed legends-in this case mathe- matical equations-not unlike those used by Picabia himself.

Fig. 5. Marius de Zayas, Francis Picabia, caricature published in Camera Work. 191 4.

The second phase of Picabia's influence began in 1915, when he returned to New York and rejoined the group around Stieglitz, assisting in the publication of the magazine 291, in which the public saw, for the first time, Picabia's fully formed machinisf style. This second, machine-oriented phase appears to have been influential both in terms of a visual impetus and a theoretical base from which American artists would extract sympathetic elements.

In the Arensbergs' New York apartment gathered a number of American artists who were exposed to this second aspect of Picabia's influence. In varying degrees, one may discern debts to Picabia in the subsequent work of many of those artists. Picabia's work may have been more immediately accessible to American artists than that of his fellow expatriate, Marcel Duchamp, if only because it was more straightforward and more directly understandable to American observers.

Picabia's first statements in the machine idiom were closely chronicled at the Modern Gallery and in the pages of 291, which published a special issue entirely devoted to Picabia and his caricatures of his New York friends. The transformation of Picabia's style was communicated and made available to the public in an article published in The New York Times in October, 1915. The artist's manifesto is presented in terms of machinery and its relationship to aesthetic possibilities: "I have been profoundly impressed by the vast mechanical develop- ment in America. The machine has become more than a mere adjunct of human life. It i s really a part of human life-perhaps the very soul. . . . I have enlisted the machinery of the modern world and introduced it into my studio." Concluding, Picabia announced that he intended to "attain the pinnacle of me- chanical ~ymbolism."~

Picabia's influence on Morton Schamberg probably dates from the beginning of 1915, when Picabia's paintings were shown at the Modern Gallery. Schamberg was well aware of avant-garde activity in New York and had seen Picabia's me-

Fig. 6. Morton L. Schamberg, Machine Fonn, 1916. oil on panel, 6% x 4%'. Collection Mr. and Mrs. Roy R. Neuberger. New York.

ART JOURNAL, XXXIX/ 1

Fig. 7. Francis Picabia. I See Again in Memory My Dear Udnie. 191 4. oil. 8'21hW X 6'6%". Collection The Museum of Modern Art. New York.

chanical drawings published in 297. Schamberg had been intro- duced by Charles Sheeler into the Arensberg group, where he encountered Picabia and his outspoken views on art.5 Begin- ning around 1916, Schamberg experimented with mechanical forms in a manner encouraged by the Frenchman's example. For instance, Schamberg's Machine Form (Fig. 6) of 1916 para- phrases, on a considerably smaller scale, elements in Picabia's I See Again in Memory My Dear Udnie (Fig. 7), shown at the Modern Gallery in 1915. Abstracted allusions to mechanical objects in both paintings are explored with regard to complex, modeled forms, as highly colored figures against neutral inter- penetrating grounds.

Sheeler's Flower Forms (Fig. 8) of 1917 also adapts portions of Picabia's Udnie, again to a smaller scale and less aggressive form. The influence of Picabia on Sheeler began with the Armory Show, and in the catalog to the 1916 Forum Exhibition, Sheeler published a statement which directly reflects concepts previously stated by Picabia.

Schamberg's Mechanical Abstraction (Fig. 9) of 1916 elabo- rates on a similar theme. The cut-away view in Schamberg's painting correlates to passages in Udnie which appear as si- multaneous interior-exterior views. This Abstraction illustrates striking congruence with Picabia's Fille n&e sans mPre (Daugh- ter Born Without a Mother, Fig. lo), exhibited in 1916. Parallel hoselike forms and similar dispositions of light contrasted with dark areas, in conjunction with a correspondent merging of figure with ground, point to Picabia as a catalytic source for Schamberg's mechanisms.

Fig. 8. Charles Sheeler. Flower Forms, 191 7, oil, 23% x 19'h". Collection Mrs. Earl Horter. Philadelphia.

Shared features may be discerned between another of Schamberg's Mechanical Abstractions (Philadelphia Museum of Art) and Picabia's Paroxysm of Sadness (Paris, Collection Collinet) from the Modern Gallery exhibit. Both compositions show an isolation of the mechanical object, which is centered on a blank, flat ground, and rendered in hard, linear silhouettes which reinforce the mechanical reference. In each, the color i s relatively restricted to a monochromatic range. Like Picabia, Schamberg too used illustrations in catalogs in popular maga- zines as points of departure.

Evidence of Picabia's continued impact on Schamberg's style can be pointed out by bringing together Picabia's Very Rare Picture on the Earth (Fig. 11) and an untitled abstraction by Schamberg of 1916 (Fig. 12), which share similarities of format, geometric object, and use of elements evoking textural possi- bilities.

Schamberg's style may be seen as a link between Picabia and the American Precisionists, transmitting Picabia's spare machine forms, now devoid of their heavily freighted inscriptions and subjective messages, to Sheeler, Demuth, and others. In this manner, Picabia contributed a number of elements to the nascent imagery of the Precisionists, not the least important being the canonization of the machine as viable subject matter. Industrial components figure strongly in Demuth's work during the late teens and early twenties. His Machinery (Fig. 13) not only examines mechanical forms, but like Picabia's machine drawings, isolates the iyage in the center of the field, allowing the unfilled space to speak as eloquently as the image itself. Further, Demuth attempted a series of object portraits, in many respects patterned after Picabia's 297 series. In both artists' portraits, objects and abstract symbols are used to convey the sitters' personalities, while comparable lettering superimposed on the surface takes on a descriptive function, as in Demuth's evocation of William Carlos Williams' poem I Saw the Figure

FALL 1979

Fig. 9. Morton L. Schamberg, Mechanical Abstrac- tion, 191 6, oil on wood. 13% x 10%". Philadelphia Museum of Art, Arensberg Collection.

Fig. 10. Francis Picabia. Fille nee sans m6re. 191 3. Collection Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York.

Five in Gold (New York, Metropolitan Museum) and the poster portrait of Georgia O'Keeffe (Yale University Art Gallery).

Demuth's formal language was occasionally close to Cubist usage, suggesting parallels with Picabia's early evolution of abstract form. In one of the New York watercolors of 1913 (Paris, private collection) Picabia uses distinct linear overlays to unite several flat planes which support a spatial implication. The layering of planar forms combined with the superimposi- tion of raylike lines became a hallmark of Demuth's style in the 1920s, as in Lancaster (Buffalo, Albright-Knox Art Gallery). Since several of these New York watercolors were acquired by

Fig. 11. Francis Picabia, Very Rare Picture on the Earth, 191 5. Collection Peggy Guggenheim. Venice.

Fig. 12. Morton L. Schamberg, untitled, 1916, oil on wood. 19% X 15'h". Collection Mrs. Jean L. Whitehill. New York.

Stieglitz, Demuth would have been able to examine them even though his path did not cross with Picabia's in New York in 1913.

Demuth, who spoke French, had adequate opportunity to develop a social and aesthetic rapport with Picabia. Besides their mutual membership in Stieglitz's circle, Demuth and Picabia were both guests at the salons of the Arensbergs and the Stettheimer sisters, and they may have met in Paris during one of Gertrude Stein's Saturday evenings, between 1912 and 1914. Mabel Dodge indicated that the Brevoort Hotel, which

ART JOURNAL, XXXIX/ 1

Fig. 13. Charles Demuth. Machinery, 1920. tempera and pencll on cardboard, 24 x 19%". Collection Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

was just across the street from her Fifth Avenue apartment, was a center for sophisticated European ideas and artists. Demuth often lodged there during his visits to the city, and Picabia took a suite at the Hotel when he came to see the Armory Show and again in 1915.

Picabia's post-1915 machinist style contributed a number of elements adapted by the Precisionists; among them are the use of unusual perspectives, or, variously, abstraction via the close- up or intimate view, which blocks out consideration of envi- ronmental relationships between object and ambient space; abstraction tied to visual fact and to the simplified object; and a reciprocal lack of human participation within the pictorial space. In Picabia's work, the machine becomes a stand-in for the individual, as in Sheeler's Self-Portrait (New York, The Museum of Modern Art) where we see a similar transmogrifi- cation of man as machine.

Picabia's machinist style was represented in the group exhi- bition which opened the Modern Gallery in October, 1915, again providing the means whereby his interests were conveyed to young American artists interested in embracing the new modernism. Further exhibitions of Picabia's paintings would continue to popularize his imagery from 1916 into the early 1920s. During this period Joseph Stella had assimilated an abstract formal inventiveness as well as the use of industrial subjects as equivalents for the developing American machine myth, which suggests interest in Picabia's iconography. Re- cently returned from Europe, Stella began to celebrate the frenzy of New York in terms of its modern monuments. As part of the Arensberg circle, Stella no doubt encountered Picabia and his ideas first hand. Stella's treatment of industrial themes translates those subjects into an even more accessible vernac- ular. Combining the Italian Futurists' romantic preference for 20th-century urban movement with Picabia's unsentimental- ized attention to machines, Stella explored the possibilities of a subjective transcription of sensations in his Brooklyn Bridge sketch of 1917 (New York, private collection). The empathetic, evocative response to the pulse of the modern city corresponds

1

Fig. 14. Francis Picabia. Music Is Like Painting, ca. 191 3- 17, watercolor. Collection N. Manoukian, Paris.

Fig. 15. Joseph Stella. Song of the Nightingale. 1918. pastel. 18 x 23%". Collection The Museum of Modern Art, New York.

to Picabia's reaction to New York published in the 1913 Tribune interview.

In his New York Interpreted series (Newark Museum, 1922), Stella combined his abstractions from skyscrapers, for example,

FALL 1979

Fig. 16. Man Ray, Dancer/Danger (L 'lmpossibilitd), 1920, oil airbrushed on glass, 24 X 16". Collection Mrne. Andre Breton. Paris.

Fig. 17. Francis Picabia. Rdveil Matin 11, ca. 191 9. Collectlon Prof. Guido Rossi. Milan.

with the intention to evoke a response in the viewer not unlike the motives which Picabia brought to his earlier, pre-machinist paintings. Describing the genesis of this series of paintings, Stella echoes Picabia's excitement in the face of the big city environment. Here is Picabia in the 1915 Tribune interview: "Almost immediately upon coming to America it flashed on me that the genius of the modern world i s machinery, and that machinery art ought to find a most vivid expression."' And this i s Stella speaking after the completion of the New York Inter- preted series: "Continually I was wandering through the im- mense metropolis . . . in search of the most salient spectacles. . . . And after a long period of . . . waiting, while I was at the Battery, all of a sudden flashed in front of me the skyscrapers, the port, the bridge."7

Picabia's watercolor Music Is Like Painting (Fig. 14) was shown at the 1917 exhibit of the Society of Independent Artists in New York, where it would have been available for study by Stella. It i s even more likely that Stella saw it before its showing at the Independents' Exhibit, since that show was organized in the Arensberg apartment. In Stella's Song of the Nightingale (Fig. 15) one finds similar arching rays used to evoke a similar musical theme.

Man Ray met Picabia during the Frenchman's second visit to New York in 1915, through Duchamp and the Arensbergs. Since at that time Man Ray didn't speak French, and Picabia disdained learning English, their theoretical exchange could have occurred only at some remove. Man Ray's Boardwalk of 1917 (Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie), however, reads as a summation of evenings spent at the Arensbergs', where chess and aesthetics dominated the conversation. Superimposed on the erratically patterned chess- board are collage elements which recall Picabia's use of such added materials in compositions exhibited in New York in 1916, while the forms relate to a strangely austere drawing, Fantaisie, published in a late issue of 291 (Dec. 1915-Jan. 1916), a maga- zine which Man Ray, drawn to its contemporaneity, acknowl- edged he read.

Flg. 18. Arthur G. Dove. Gear, 1922, oil on canvas, 22 x 18". Collection Terry Dintenfass. Inc.. New York.

ART JOURNAL, XXXIX/1

Man Ray's rendering of the wheel or gear motif in Dancer/ Danger of 1920 (Fig. 16) shows the gears so exactly defined as completely to belie the functional properties expected of the machine works. This may be allied to similar dysfunctional mechanical constructions by Picabia (Fig. 17), whose Alarm Clock (Milan, Coll. Prof. Guido Rossi) appeared on the cover of Dada in May 1919. Although published in Zurich, the magazine no doubt reached Man Ray and Duchamp in New York not long after it was issued.

Arthur Dove's Gear (Fig. 18) demonstrates familiarity with Picabia's Machine Tournez Vite (Fig. 19) and the Novia series done in 1917, although Dove rejects Picabia's engineering- diagram style for a more painterly and aggressive execution. Additional affinities with Picabia's industrial wheel device are found in The Lantern (Chicago Art Institute), in which Dove synthesizes the mechanical motif and geometrical form in a totally abstract fashion. Arthur Dove met Picabia in Stieglitz's gallery in 1913, and their association was continued in 1915, when they met again at the Arensberg apartment. A painting

possibly dating from 1913, Music (Collection William C. Dove), doesn't so much imitate Picabia's style as it uses his ideas as points of departure. Further, Dove displays repeated intimacy with Picabia's work in his own versions of the object portrait. Collage materials are used for their anti-art connotations and for their associative value, as in Dove's Portrait of Alfred Stieglitz (New York, The Museum of Modern Art).

John Covert, Arensberg's cousin, picked up on Picabia's anti- art principles, incorporating unusual materials and symbolic allusions with provocative titles and mathematical figures in a formal matrix that suggests a close affinity to works by Picabia. Elaborating on Picabia's music-and-art analogies, Covert at- tempted to provide visual parallels for musical themes, as in his Vocalization (Yale University Art Gallery), where this con- cept i s taken a step further by weaving close color harmonies and staccato optical components together via collage elements. These unpainterly materials were also used by Picabia to em- phasize the flexible extension of the modern artist's decisions.

The concluding months of Picabia's second New York visit are poorly documented and obscured by fuzzy allusions to a dissipated existence. Picabia left New York during the summer of 1916 and went to Barcelona. But by March, 1917, he was back in New York, publishing three issues of his one-man-show magazine, 391, which were circulated among members of the Stieglitz and Arensberg groups.

Even though Picabia had moved on to Switzerland in Septem- ber, 1917, his influence on American art continued to reverber- ate through subsequent exhibitions and statements published in art magazines into the 1920s. Picabia's proto-Dada activity in New York, underscored by his vocal, ebullient personality, contributed a foundation for the rise of modernism in this country. He excited American artists with the possibilities of- fered by a technological society, reflected in aspects of the American machine, both as a source of visual imagery and as an impetus for re-examining attitudes toward art in society..

1. This paper was presented at the College Art Association annual meeting in New York City on January 27. 1976 as part of the session. "Interaction of European and American Art. 1910-25." The author would like to acknowl- edge the interest and encouragement of Gail Levin, chairperson of that session.

2. "Picabia. Art Rebel. Here to Teach New Movement." The New York rimes, February 13, 1913. sect. 5, p. 9.

3. "A Post-Cubist's Impressions of New York." New York Tribune. March 9, 1913. part 11. p. 1.

4. "French Artists Spur on an American Art," New York Tribune. October 24, 191 5. part iV. p. 2.

5. Significant in establishing a direct connection between Schamberg and Pi- cabia is Schamberg's role in organizing a show at the McCiees Gallery in the spring of 191 6, billed as "Philadelphia's first exhibition of Advanced Modern Art." It was Schamberg's idea to bring together several Armory Show exhib- itors for the benefit of the Philadelphia audience, and among those partici- pants he included Picabia.

6. New York Tribune, October 24. 191 5, op. cit. 7. Joseph Stella, "Discovery of America: Autobiographical Notes," Art News.

LIX (Nov. 1960). p. 65.

Fig. 19. Francis Picabia, Machine Tournez Vite, 1916. tempera. 49 Jan Thompson teaches Art History at the University of Santa Clara. Cailfornia, x 32 cm. Schwartz Collection, Milan. and is a doctoral candidate at Rutgers University.

FALL 1979 21