Viewing page 30 of 32

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

28
'65 she was given a major show at the Whitechapel Art Gallery in London and in '73 one at the Whitney Museum. From '67 she has divided her time between the city and country and need have no fears now about not being honored in both places as the original she is. The collages of '77, made of retrieved charcoal drawings from the Hofmann days were a kind of Beethovean coda to what went before yet imply no  [[strikethrough]] end [[/strikethrough]] termination.

I asked Krasner whether there were other meanings to those works than the ones drawn. 

No. I don't know what they're about. I haven't read them yet. I painted them but that doesn't mean I can read. [[strikethrough]] it yet. [[/strikethrough]] I have enough confidence in myself to accept what came out, even though I can't rattle off a definition.

Obviously, I'm hauling out work of thirty years ago. Obviously pulling that out. Dealing with it. Not ignoring, hiding it. I'm saying here it is in another form. This is where I've come from: from there to here.

It gives me a kick to be able to go back and pick up thirty years ago. It renews my confidence in something I believe. That there is continuity.

The issue of Krasner's survival out of [[strikethrough]]the medium of [[strikethrough]] a movement so turbulant and in the end [[strikethrough]]deemed violent[[/strikethrough]] doomed is an interesting one. Rosenberg has written that, "based on the phenomenon of conversion, the new movement is, with the majority of painters, essentially a religious movement" ANdec 52

It seems to me that her salvation may have been her rejection of conversion, that ironic detachment about, if not hatred for, totalism—Rimbaud's "holy image"-- that she first gained long ago