Embedded Files
[1]
Cabrillo Community College, Aptos
English with a Multicultural and Multimedia Emphasis, Professor Ariel Robello
April 2021
Barkley L. Hendricks’ Attempt at Separating Art and Politics
Barkley L. Hendricks in his New London home, 2007. C.M. Glover for The New York Times.
Ever since popular culture started recognizing marginalized artists as artists, there has been a strong tendency to associate their work with their entire community and the politics surrounding it. That said, there are some artists who purposefully have their work revolve around politics and use their platform to shed light on aspects of the government having to do with them and their identity. In contrast, there are other artists who create their art based on their internal feelings or personal experiences, largely disregarding politics. Although these artists often deny being political, their art can sometimes be considered as such by the general public due to the pieces creating controversy. An artist of the sort is American artist Barkely Hendricks, born in 1945. Predominantly an oil painter, he extensively contributed to Black portraiture and “explored very weighty and valid themes affecting his society” (Devonish). Hendricks started his artistic career in the 1960s at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts and continued his revolutionary work up until his death in 2017. At first he was solely
known within the Black community and this “relative obscurity may be partially due to his audience being perceived to be one and the same as his subjects” (Devonish). As the years went by, Hendricks was able to express his art was essentially non-political and with the removal of this misinterpretation, he gained popularity and a wider audience. In a 2016 interview with The Brooklyn Rail, Hendricks mentioned his early work was barely political, yet it was seen as merely that. He said, “in the 1960s, America was fucked up and didn’t see what some artists or what black artists were doing. It was political in their minds. My paintings were about people that were part of my life. If they were political, it’s because they were a reflection of the culture we were drowning in” (Pedro). For most of history, art was seen as an activity for the elite in which their aesthetics furthered Eurocentrism as it was disseminated by way of visual representations throughout the world by European colonial empires. A high percentage of the models were white and the rare occasions people of color were represented, it was in a diminishing manner as slaves or servants. Seemingly, Barkley Hendricks’ work is an antidote to that Eurocentrist aesthetic, although he ironically did not want to be labeled as such. He had a strong desire to celebrate Black people, asserting they were just as worthy to be depicted in a grand manner, but he “resisted classification as a political painter, or as a black painter for that matter” (Grimes). Nevertheless, his art implements Black aesthetics made popular in the 1960s and 70s via social justice movements, the subtle use of double entendre and the appropriation of current political symbols. Despite his oxymoronic vision of himself and his artwork, Hendricks had a leading impact due to his notable contributions to Black representation in the American art world.
[4] Lawdy Mama, 1969. Oil and gold leaf on canvas, 136.53 x 92.08 cm. The Studio Museum in Harlem, New York City.
Given that Hendricks “was troubled by the lack of black people immortalized in art,” he devoted his entire art career to the portrayal of ordinary Black folks from his community starting with one of his first portraits, Lawdy Mama (Curated by Ki). Though widely thought to be a depiction of Angela Davis or Kathleen Cleaver, African American political activists, this painting is actually a portrait of his second cousin, Kathy Williams. Hendricks often stressed his desire to paint ordinary people because he strongly believed they were worthy of veneration. However his decision to make her face so comparable to iconic Black women can have his audience questioning his non-political stance. He painted Lawdy Mama to be the juxtaposition of divinity and normalcy he sees in black people. He displayed his cousin in the center with a gold leaf background making her “appear regal, like a monarch” (Bacon). Combining royalty and religion, he gave her “a rounded frame [that] alludes to Byzantine and Orthodox imagery of culturally relished religious icons” (Bacon). Because this type of art is distinct and easily recognizable, his choice to recreate it is proof of his desire to immortalize everyday people in an idolizing way. Continuing to point out her holiness, he depicted her natural afro “divinely around her head” suggesting a resemblance to a saint’s halo (Bacon). By illustrating her natural hair, especially during the Black Power movement that started in the 1960s, he is alluding to this movement of racial pride and the creation of Black aesthetics. Despite the fact Hendricks rejected being political, this portrait shows his awareness of the period’s celebratory assertion of Black femininity and beauty. In contrast to this goddess-like attitude, he presented his cousin’s ordinariness by dressing her in a simple cotton and striped dress. Her pose is interpreted to be casual, but having her arm crossed over her body manifests her defensiveness (Knight). Albeit the fact that the Civil Rights movement was in full force, she was still a vulnerable Black woman in America and it was necessary for her to be
protective of herself. Creating a provocative piece such as Lawdy Mama which glorifies Black women during the peak of the Black Power movement caused tension between Hendricks and his audience. As much as he “didn’t see anything inherently controversial or contentious about a black person painting black people” because he is right, “inherently” there isn’t, one must remember there was a sociocultural uprising for and by Black people during that time (Kweku). With this in mind, it is understandable viewers may struggle to separate the Black Power Movement and a Black artist creating art solely based on portraying Black people with Black aesthetics. As much as today’s world is reevaluating how art is seen and “what the word ‘political’ means in relation to art making,” it was almost inevitable for the public in the 1970s to see his art as a powerful political statement (Arabindan-Kesson).
[2] Brilliantly Endowed (Self- Portrait), 1977. Oil and acrylic on canvas, 167.6 x 122.5 cm.
Provided that Barkley Hendricks had a rebellious nature in the sense that his work did not closely follow the various art movements of his era, he also refused to let critiques about his art go unanswered, a personality trait clearly observable in his 1977 piece, Brilliantly Endowed. This nude self-portrait was incredibly risqué for its time and its title is clearly a double-entendre. Hendricks created this bold painting as a “cheeky response to art critic [Hilton] Kramer’s review of his work” (Curated by Ki). Earlier in 1977, Kramer had been positively speaking on the artist’s work following his first couple exhibits and mentioned “that he was a brilliantly endowed painter who erred, perhaps, on the side of slickness” (Kramer). Despite Kramer’s favorable commentary and review, Hendricks saw it as an opportunity to “[mock] American fantasies about the black male body” (Johnson). The commodification of the Black body has existed since the birth of the United States and the prevailing of their objectification continues today. Through various art pieces including Brilliantly Endowed and Sister Lucas, Hendricks decided to give bodily control back to himself and the rest of the Black community. He insisted these nude portraits were nothing militant or defiant, but rather an empowerment for Black men and women to be themselves as they are. Moreover, “he sought to counter … art’s overwhelming championing of whiteness as the only celebration of corporeality, spirituality, and truth” and to challenge the Eurocentric framework of respectability politics surrounding nudity. (Sargent, “Rarely…”). In order to create a humoristic, yet loaded piece resisting this “championing,” Hendricks painted Brilliantly Endowed in which he “depicts himself in the nude with a strong, idealized physique that plays to stereotypical perceptions of the hyper-masculine black male” (Schoonmaker). There is substantial ambiguity in this piece between the empowerment and the perversion of his body. His nakedness is emphasized, and in a way perverted, as he keeps on white socks, white sneakers and
a white cap on his head. He also sports a necklace, a couple bracelets and rings. The full black background and the tall open pose with “a toothpick hanging casually from his lips” demonstrates his provocative machismo attitude (Curated by Ki). With this in mind, there is also some vulnerability that can be interpreted by his nakedness especially when one knows Hendricks had the desire “for the black body to signify something else” like beauty and pride rather than just a community combating racism and prejudice (Sargent, “Barkley…”). At the time, much of America and the art world were not ready for such a daring nude portrait of a black male. This unreadiness unsurprisingly caused turmoil within the general public, especially since many saw “a subtle ideological and conceptual connection with the Black Power Movement,” like they did with Lawdy Mama, whether that connection was intentional or not (Schoonmaker). Seeing Hendricks confront the diverse notions on the black body by creating visual representations with double- entendres that differentiate “real everyday people and their convenient symbolic facsimiles” while on the line of empowerment and sexualization continues to challenge his apoliticism (Sargent, “Barkley…”).
[3] In the Crosshairs of the States, 2016. Oil and acrylic on canvas with American flag bunting and Confederate flag, 90.17cm painting diameter, 175.26 x 154.94 x 15.24 cm fully installed. Jack Shainman Gallery, New York.
As a result of Black deaths due to police brutality becoming increasingly broadcasted across the nation, Hendricks began to openly appropriate current political symbols in his final pieces such as In the Crosshairs of the States. Hendricks has always called his art career of forty-plus years a “continuum” reflecting themes of personal interest like “black bodies, fashion, [and] posing” (Pedro). Another theme he has not been afraid to paint is his discontent with the American army and the police force. One can see this in some of his earlier works like his 1968 painting called F.T.A. (meaning ‘Fuck the Army’) which was a response to his drafting for the Vietnam War. In his twenty first century paintings, he has been more explicit about the police brutality going on in America which he labeled as “a current theme that is part of [our] culture now” (Pedro). Although Hendricks strongly believed “the word ‘political’ carries so much baggage,” hence his refusal to describe his art in that way, he did admit the Crosshairs Study and In the Crosshairs of the States are “in direct correlation to what’s happening” in the U.S. (Rosenberg). Both of these pieces are variations of one another and are “instantly recognizable from national coverage of Trayvon Martin’s death” in 2012, but they also reflect the too many African Americans who have been tragically and brutally killed by the American police force (Rosenberg). Analyzing the latest of the two, In the Crosshairs of the States, Hendricks displayed a young black man in a gray hooded sweatshirt on a tondo. It is crucial to realize the importance of the hood being on his head as this style has been universalized by all races because it is quite literally the purpose of a hood. Yet, it has also evolved into a sign of mischievousness, suspicion, or even gang membership, but almost only if the wearer is a person of color. The young male depicted in the painting “is seen through the crosshairs of a
gun scope” with his hands held up clearly signifying he has a gun pointed at him (curated by Ki). On his sweatshirt there is an image of a black face with a halo and eyes looking up, a foreboding to what is about to happen to this young black male. Underneath the tondo is an American flag bunting which is most often used as a decoration for festive events. Hendricks’ use of the bunting in this installation can be seen as America’s permission, and maybe even perpetuation, of the killing of African Americans. Furthermore, he added the Confederate flag behind both the tondo and the bunting. This flag is loaded with racist history and is often used as the symbol for white supremacy. Having the backdrop of an installation be this flag, a symbol truly horrific and deeply traumatizing to some, presents who Hendricks sees as the perpetrating group in an explicitly audacious manner. All three of the installation’s elements caused controversy within the art world and Hendricks’ audience. The installation is explicit and the meaning behind it is obvious. Hendricks is putting the blame for the deaths of African Americans due to police brutality on America as a whole, but more specifically on those who support the Confederacy and white supremacy. At this point, it was hard for him to continue to deny none of his work was political. In an interview with Artspace he was asked about how a press release called one of his last shows the “most political to date” and about the politics surrounding In the Crosshairs of the States. He admits saying “that’s one of those unfortunate situations—a part of promoting my work. It’s a small portion, and certainly a small portion along my career” (Rosenberg). In this instance, Hendricks revealed some of his earlier works may have been a bit political, like Lawdy Mama or Brilliantly Endowed, however he simply preferred to have his work looked at for its artistic components rather than be associated with politics.
A point important to acknowledge is the privilege and freedom white artists have whether they are depicting European aesthetics, painting abstract, landscapes, and anything else. These artists can decide for themselves whether their art is political or not. On the other side of the spectrum are artists of color. Most of what they create will inevitably be seen, by at least some, as political or propagation of an ideology the artist has, whether it is true or not. For Barkley Hendricks, this barrier of artistic freedom for Black and other POC artists was incredibly infuriating. To him, “the decision to paint people in a way that celebrates and even valorizes them makes a person an empathetic artist,” which in theory is true, but “when your subjects are black, and you are black, well, that’s something else entirely” (Kweku). Since the dawn of America’s birth, simply being a Black artist has been seen as radical. But on top of that, painting other black people was and is still seen as advocacy and therefore, political. So much so that despite Hendricks’ strong refusal about being political, his art was nevertheless featured in the internationally known exhibit Soul of a Nation: Art in the Age of Black Power 1963-1983. This exhibit, designed by Tate Modern, “[offered] a survey of diverse artistic responses to the most seismic years of Black social activism” (de Young). The exhibit coordinators clearly exposed his art as political and as someone who has gone to see it at San Francisco’s de Young Museum, the politicalness is what I got from his art. I was captivated and thought his pieces were beautiful, but I definitely saw them as political because that is how it was sold to me and how I was taught to see Black made art. Although it can still be hard to separate politics and art, especially art made by people of color, Barkley Hendricks' views have changed my perceptions of how I see art and to not see it just in a political sense. Seeing Hendricks’ Brilliantly Endowed in person was definitely shocking at first, but now that I have read about it, I understand his reasoning behind the piece and its double-entendre title and now I will say it is more artistically surprising rather than downright shocking. His Lawdy Mama has become one of my favorites because of its religious and monarchical connotations incorporated with 1960s Black aesthetics that we still see in high numbers today. Finally, the piece In the Crosshairs of the States is an incredibly powerful one which has stayed in my mind since it is so current with today’s events and as Hendricks himself said, “it’s obviously meant to reflect what’s going on” (Rosenberg). Throughout the entirety of his career, Hendricks has been seen as an audacious and controversial artist simply for wanting to create art about the people around him who so happened to also be black. He followed the idea of rejecting labels and creating art that moved him, whether it be a political piece, a landscape or just a friend. Like many other artists, he preferred to talk about “the methods and style and focus of [his] work that doesn’t rely on that area of political-ness” (Rosenberg). Perhaps the rest of the world should practice separating art and politics and see what that does to our vision of artists and their work.
Works Cited:
Arabindan-Kesson, Anna. “Iconic Portraits: Revising the Canon.” Tate Research Publication, 2017, www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/in-focus/family- jules/iconic-portraits.
Bacon, Camille. “Lawdy Mama (1969): Celebrating the Ordinariness of Black Women in ‘Black Refractions.’” Smith College Museum of Art, 23 Apr. 2020, www.scma.smith.edu/blog/lawdy-mama-1969-celebrating-ordinariness-black-women-black-refractions.
Curated by Ki. “Remembering Barkley L. Hendricks.” Curated., 25 Apr. 2017, www.curatedbyki.blogspot.com/2017/04/remembering-barkley-l- hendricks.html.
De Young Museum. “Soul of a Nation: Art in the Age of Black Power 1963–1983.” De Young Museum, 10 May 2019, www.deyoung.famsf.org/exhibitions/soul-of-a-nation.
Devonish, Lee. “Barkley L. Hendricks: A Black Pop Artist?” LeeDevonish, 20 Oct. 2019, www.leedevonish.com/barkley-l-hendricks-a-black-pop-artist/.
Glover, C.M. “Barkley L. Hendricks in His Home in New London, Conn.,” The New York Times, 2007, www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/arts/barkley-hendricks- dead-portrait-painter.html.
Grimes, William. “Barkley L. Hendricks, Portraitist of a New Black Pride, Dies at 72.” The New York Times, 21 Apr. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/arts/barkley-hendricks-dead-portrait-painter.html.
Johnson, Ken. “Slick and Styling: Provocative Poses.” The New York Times, 5 Dec. 2008, www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/arts/design/05hend.html.
Knight, Christopher. “Barkley L. Hendricks at the Santa Monica Museum of Art.” LA Times Blogs - Culture Monster, Los Angeles Times, 25 May 2009, www.latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2009/05/barkley-l-hendricks-at-the-santa-monica-museum-of-art.html.
Kramer, Hilton. “Art: To the Last Detail.” The New York Times, 17 June 1977, www.nytimes.com/1977/06/17/archives/art-to-the-last-detail.html.
Kweku, Ezekiel. “Surface Tension: The Portraiture of Barkley L. Hendricks.” MTV News, 27 Apr. 2017, www.mtv.com/news/3006662/surface-tension/.
Pedro, Laila. “BARKLEY L. HENDRICKS with Laila Pedro.” The Brooklyn Rail, 6 Apr. 2016, www.brooklynrail.org/2016/04/art/barkley-l-hendricks-with-laila- pedro.
Rosenberg, Karen. “Barkley L. Hendricks on Why You Shouldn’t Call Him a Political Artist.” Artspace, 15 Mar. 2019, www.artspace.com/magazine/interviews_features/qa/barkley-hendricks-interview-53596.
Sargent, Antwaun. “Barkley L. Hendricks Painted Black People as We Are.” www.vice.com, VICE, 23 Apr. 2017, www.vice.com/en/article/aem7yb/barkley-l- hendricks-painted-black-people-as-we-are.
---. “Rarely Seen Barkley Hendricks Paintings Show Early Talent as Portraitist of ‘Black Cool.’” Artsy.net, ART SY, 16 Aug. 2017, www.artsy.net/article/artsy- editorial-barkley-hendricks-portraitist-black-cool.
Schoonmaker, Trevor. “Barkley L. Hendricks: Reverberations.” Jack Shainman Gallery, 126-129, jackshainman.com/uploads/000000/157375079439/Hendricks_Press-compressed.pdf.
Photo Credits:
Craig, Norman. Soul of a Nation - DSCF7279a. 2017. Tate Modern Museum, London, United Kingdom.
Hendricks, Barkley. Brilliantly Endowed (Self-Portrait), 1977. Oil and acrylic on canvas, 167.6 x 122.5 cm.
---. In the Crosshairs of the States, 2016. Oil and acrylic on canvas with American flag bunting and Confederate flag, 90.17cm painting diameter, 175.26 x 154.94 x 15.24 cm fully installed. Jack Shainman Gallery, New York.
---. Lawdy Mama, 1969. Oil and gold leaf on canvas. 136.53 x 92.08 cm. The Studio Museum in Harlem, New York City.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse