Sunday, June 8, 2008 at 9:21 pm
The Cool School

I caught an early look at The Cool School, a documentary about the West Coast art scene in the 1950s and '60s. Directed by Morgan Neville, co-written by him and Kristine McKenna, it premieres Tuesday at 10 P.M. on PBS.
It's built around the focal point of L.A. art in those days, the Ferus Gallery, Ur-institution of the West Coast art scene. Ferus was founded by the late Walter Hopps, the eagle-eyed curator who went on to become director of the Corcoran in Washington, D.C. and a character who should get a film all his own some day. (I love it that Frank Gehry tells the camera: "We all thought he was in the CIA.") Then along came Irving Blum, a skillful operator with a Cary Grant accent who partnered in, gave the place cred with rich collectors and made it work on a wider stage. On which he eventually waltzed off with Hopps' wife.
The Ferus represented Ed Ruscha, Robert Irwin and Billy Al Bengston. It famously gave an easterner, Andy Warhol, his first gallery show. (Take that, Leo Castelli.) This was back in a day when, as one West Coast collector tells it, there wasn't even a French restaurant in L.A. The New York dealer Ivan Karp describes the L.A. art scene in those days as something that he didn't even know existed, "a miasmal mist in the distance."
This is a film that's more about the scene than the art. It's got a better than average made-for-TV documentary feel. Lots of talking heads in short takes, a running soundtrack to keep the joint jumping, more data points than grace notes, no time to pause. Jeff Bridges — an interesting photographer by the way — gamely narrates. I wish they hadn't made him say the words "a generation of renegade artists" or talk about Hopps modernizing Pasadena's "cultural discourse". There's a bit of the inevitable Behind the Music story arc. The L.A. scene is born. It grows. Then comes the money and the drugs, the drugs and the money. Bengston comes on camera again. "All we were was whores and Irving was the pimp." We're spared the reunion tour.
See it for all parts having to do with Ed Kienholz and for the good archival footage, including some of Marcel Duchamp — in Pasadena Hopps organized his first retrospective — and an early '60s newscaster telling his camera that in Venice, California, "only the most beat of the beatniks remain, tapping out their pathetic rhythms of protest."
All these years later the case could be made that L.A. art of the '50s and '60s, for all the sanctimony about taking the art historical focus away from New York, and despite the canonization of Ruscha and Irwin, is still a miasma in the mist. I'll give this film credit for clearing the mist a bit. As Irwin says: "Even though we didn't have any evidence, we were completely sure we were on the right track and everybody else was full of sh*t."
Everybody else wasn't full of sh*t. (By the way, can you guess the word I've just bleeped here?) But that doesn't mean they weren't on the right track too.
Looking Around
RSS Feed
Daily Email
Recent Posts
Looking Around - TIME.com Archives
Archives
Blogroll
- Alecsoth.com
- Art Law Blog
- Art to Go
- Artblog.net
- Artsjournal.com
- artsjournal.com/aboutlastnight
- artsjournal.com/artopia
- artsjournal.com/culturegrrl
- artsjournal.com/man
- C-monster
- Daily Dose of Architecture
- Eric Etheridge
- Hatchets and Skewers
- Illicit Cultural Property
- Looting Matters
- Plain Sight
- The Exhibitionist
- The New Modernist
- The Walker Art Center
More TIME Blogs
Top Stories
- States Financial Outlook: Getting Worse Fast
- Big Three Bailout Hits Some Speed Bumps in Washington
- Heeding No Authority, Israeli Settler Youth Rampage in Hebron
- Laugh and the World Laughs With You: How Happiness Spreads
- Robert Gates: Secretary of Hilarity!
- A Pirate Ransom Deal: Who Gets the Money?
- Lara Croft Is Back and Remarkably Well-Preserved
- Oil-Price Drop Forces Big Energy to Retreat
- Even Google Gets Frugal in the Recession
- After Mumbai, Can the US Cool India-Pakistan Tension?
Monday, June 9, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Yes, but why you have to bleep "shallot" is beyond me.
I second your comment on Jeff Bridges being an interesting photographer. I have a copy of his 2003 book, "Pictures." I had no idea he took pictures, let alone such good ones.
Virtually all the pictures in the 189-page book wereshot with a panoramic camera (the Widelux, which uses 35mm film) and are shot in available light in black and white.
In his intro, Peter Bogdanovich writes,
"Jeff's choice of the Widelux camera is emblematic of his own vision, which generously includes as much as possible of the ragtag world in which he has spent so much of his life."
That ragtag world, as seen in these remarkably poised yet surprising pictures, is that of the movie sets where Bridges has made his name.
Most of the pictures were taken in the '80s and '90s. There are many famous faces--Bianca Jagger, Robin Williams, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Landau, Michelle Pfeiffer, Cybill Shepherd, Isabella Rossellini, John Turturro, Benicio Del Toro, and self-portraits with colleagues and family (such as brother Beau), to name just a few.
But that isn't what makes the book so good.
Pictures of celebrities are as plentiful as movie popcorn, and many are about as substantial. But here the attraction is the spontaneity of the people and the relevance of everything in the frame.
"The Widelux is a fickle mistress," writes Bridges, who began taking pictures in high school. "Its viewfinder isn't accurate, and there's no manual focus, so it has an arbitrariness to it, a capricious quality.
"I like that. It's something I aspire to in all my work--a lack of preciousness that makes things more human and honest, a willingness to receive what's there in the moment, and to let go of the result."
This quote from Bogdanovich sums things up nicely:
"Quite commonly referred to as the most versatile and underrated star on the American screen, he is also hugely gifted in a number of ways not known to the general public.
"He paints, he composes, he sings, and as this book so vivdly demonstrates, he is one hell of a photographer."