This weekend at Hyperallergic Thomas Micchelli reviews Dying on Stage: New Painting in New York, the Garis & Hahn exhibition curated by Kyle Chayka that was inspired by “The New Casualists,�
a 2011 essay I published in The Brooklyn Rail. Noting that much of the work in the show veers into representational territory and freely quotes from art history, Micchelli asks the following questions:
What does the process of reinvestigation say about the notion of freedom that Casualism is supposed to embody?
what extent does intuition come into play, and where do convention and
conditioning intrude? Does reality need to be forced through a cultural
filter in order to be understood? Should past frameworks be scavenged
for tools to compartmentalize and analyze direct experience?
Is it possible for �studied, passive-aggressive incompleteness� to address complex structures and extra-visual ideas?
Casualism�s state of incompleteness, which is the flip side of
unfettered freedom (if there is no limit to choice, all choices are
necessarily limited), a conclusive metaphor or something we need to get
…But how much weight will this fresh visual argot be able to carry? What
structures will it rely upon in order to avoid dissipation and
Which of these two visions � the unchecked or the purposely restricted �
makes more sense for our time? Which is more honest, and which is
In conclusion, Micchelli writes that
Casualism, with its humble anti-heroics, acts as a necessary corrective
to the overblown production values that have carried away most of the
market�s high end as well as the lion�s share of media attention….In that way it resembles the �Vow of Chastity�
taken by the Dogme 95 group of mostly Danish directors who resolved to
strip filmmaking down to its essentials. Dogme 95 was too limiting to
last, ultimately interfering with the creative process it was meant to
nurture. Casualism will also run its course, but, like Dogme, its call
for directness, spontaneity and self-effacement will leave its mark.
I agree completely. Artists working in a Casualist mode have already begun to move on. For ambitious artists (i.e. artists who want to make culturally meaningful work, not those who want to succeed in the art market), the Casualist approach may be too reductive. Personally, I’ve been looking at overworking as a companion strategy to the post-optimistic, underworked approach of Casualism. What happens when you won’t give up, working on a painting long past the obvious point of resolution? Note: This is harder than it sounds.
And: Stay tuned for details about “Dense Surveillance,” my solo show at the expansive Fine Arts Gallery of Westchester Community College, opening in September…
Image at top: Tatiana Berg, Face, 2013, oil on canvas, 36 x 30 inches.
Sharon Butler: Precisionist Casual @ Pocket Utopia
Reader response to “Abstract Painting: The New Casualists”
Claude Viallat: Exploring Casualist abstraction in 1960s France
"Personally, I've been looking at overworking as the antidote to the Casualist approach. What happens when you keep working on a painting long past the obvious point of resolution? Note: This is harder than it sounds."
I am fascinated by this concept as well! It is extremely hard to keep the work alive that way, but the dense richness that can possibly occur is so exciting.
Overworking as an intention will cause the casualist to spend more time on each painting perhaps. I like the casualist notion of simplicity and the lack of heavy handedness in this kind of work.
I have recently come across your writing on Casualism, and I am finding it intriguing.
The concept and the writing is a bit dense for me to fully digest and comprehend. My gut feeling when looking at the associated art works is that I love this form of expression and this approach to art making.
I also feel this form of expression or exploration is not totally new. As an absolute fan of Picasso, his tireless exploration with different and new medium, creating limitless invention of amusing forms, is what I am seeing in Casualist works.
Hence, I do not agree with Micchelli's conclusion about this approach to art creation being too-limiting, or ultimately-interfering-with-creative-process.