Tuesday, 7 February 2012

Richard Tuttle



Richard Tuttle (b. 1941, Rahway, New Jersey; lives and works in New York and New Mexico) 
44th Wire Piece, 1972
Wire and template for pencil line
47 x 22 x 11 1/4 in.
The Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles
Gift of Lannan Foundation


Despite the fact that the ideas of artist Richard Tuttle predominantly manifest themselves in 3D form, he would not class his work as ‘sculpture’, but as drawing.  For this reason, his work challenges the traditional ideas of drawing.  Tuttle himself says, “I put this enormous pressure on what drawing is, but I know it’s not the conventional way of thinking about drawing. Everything in life is drawing; drawing is such an enormous thing in itself.”[1]

His interest lies in exploring the relationship between sculpture and drawing and in doing so he raises questions about what drawing is.  He uses charcoal, ink, graphite and watercolour, juxtaposing these with more everyday materials such as paper, wire, cloth, nails, styrofoam and plywood.  Tuttle’s investigations into this relationship include his wire pieces from the 1970s. The minimal and delicate nature of these pieces really appeals to me, as does the transition from ink to wire to shadow; 2D to 3D, then back to 2D again.  I enjoy the subtly and fluidity of the marks.  Tuttle’s interest in the calligraphic line is evident in this work. 

As well as being concerned with the careful observation of detail and of visible things, I was also intrigued by Richard Tuttle’s fascination with the less tangible, with things unseen: 

“I was doing white paper octagons on a wall at a museum in Dallas. And the critic came along and made mock introductions, “Oh, this is Richard Tuttle. He’s interested in impermanence in the arts.” And she said that to Betty Parsons, and Betty just immediately snapped back, “What’s more permanent than the invisible?”[2]


[1] Interview with Richard Tuttle, Art21 website, URL: http://www.art21.org/texts/richard-tuttle/interview-richard-tuttle-drawing-and-exhibitions, (06/02/12)
[2] Ibid.

No comments: