Victor Martinez - Peruvian Watercolor Artist

Victor Martinez

            What inspires an artist?  Why does he devote his work to a certain subject matter, depicted in a certain style?  Often these questions rise first and foremost to an art viewer’s mind.  For Peruvian watercolor artist Victor Martinez, his inspiration comes from the native Andean people of Peru, his home country.  He loves how they are still attached to nature and have resisted cultural influences.  As he says, they are “people who unintentionally resist being absorbed by the huge process of civilization and who fully exercise their humanity. That is what I try to convey in my work: their simplicity, their direct contact with nature, the peculiar clothes, attractive and full of color, of women whose faces still show candor and joy.”  He realistically and sensitively paints these Andean people and their landscapes and seascapes.

            Victor Martinez was born in 1932 and grew up in Arequipa, Peru and learned about art at a very young age from his artistic father, Victor Martínez Málaga, creator and founder of the Carlos Bacaflor School of Art of Arequipa, Peru.  His father was an oil painter and taught Victor in his realistic, traditional style, always teaching him what an artist’s work is.  He adopted his father’s dream of a loyal and academic road to truth and reality in art.

            Victor Martinez began his formal education at the Regional School of Fine Arts, and then moved to Lima, Peru, where he took advanced courses at the National School of Fine Arts.  Following his formal education however, he dedicated his time to graphic design and illustration until 1987, at the age of 55, when he returned to his first love, fine art.  Annual trips to California continued to advance his career.  He eventually permanently moved to the United States in 1998.  He currently lives and resides in Scottsdale, Arizona, traveling each year to different parts of North and South America with his wife Gladys, who he’s been married to for thirty-seven years.

Victor Martinez is a self-taught watercolor artist.  He paints solely with Winsor and Newton watercolors, which he believes has a wider range of higher concentrated pigments, and he does not paint with white.  He paints on unstretched Arches Cold Press paper in at least 300 pound weight with Princeton and Richeson brand brushes.  He paints standing up, with his easel at a 90-degree angle, and tries to complete his paintings in one session.  He paints in a very systematic way, always working in the same pattern of first doing a detailed drawing, then doing the background, painting the face, the costume, and finishes with the hands and feet.  He uses photographic reference materials that he takes on his yearly trips to Peru to make his paintings.  He also employs the use of mirrors, to see his work inverted, and a hair dryer to speed up the drying process.

He paints in a realistic manner because that is what he was taught since he was young.  Even with the different trends of modern art movements, he never tried to vary the way he expressed himself.  He paints that which attracts him: images showing man deprived from superfluous appearances, man in his daily work, living his life as he must live it, exercising his reason to be alive.  He also paints the place in which that man lives.  He finds that there is still yet something that he has not yet painted.  He believes he is generating a body of work that for many reasons he had postponed, but feels great satisfaction to what he does, and that it constitutes his reason for living.

His high artistic quality, subject matter, and medium have made him internationally renowned.  His paintings have been shown in numerous museums and are part of private collections in North and South America, as well as Europe.  His watercolors have earned him professional national awards in the United States, including the “Best of Show” at the 20^th anniversary international exhibition of the San Diego Watercolor Society in 2000, as well as the most prestigious award in his hometown, El Diploma de la Ciudad de Arequipa a la Labor Artística.  His works have also been featured in popular art magazines such as New Art International (Jan 1998), International Artist Magazine (June/July 1999), Watercolor Magazine (Fall 1999), Splash 6 (Jan 2000), Southwest Art Magazine (April 2000), Artist’s Magazine (December 2000, February 2006), American Artist Magazine (October 2004), and Watercolor Magic Magazine (June 2006).  He is also in major collections including the Banco del Sur in Peru, and is collected by several Mobil Oil executives and a United States ambassador to Peru.

As well as painting, he also teaches private watercolor lessons from his studio in Scottsdale, Arizona.  He has made some videos and often talks about and shares his watercolor techniques with others.  He feels a great satisfaction when others gain an appreciation for watercolors. 

While some artist’s inspiration and reasoning behind their works remain a mystery, Victor Martinez’s art is easy to see and appreciate.  He says that to him, “capturing people and their environment in watercolor paintings is an irresistible challenge. Each time I pick up the brush I'm faced with a new adventure, and that's what provides the satisfaction that inspires me to keep on painting.”  It is great that he keeps on painting these masterpieces for everyone to enjoy.

Bibliography

www.victormartinez.com

http://www.winsornewton.com/community/featured-artists/victor-martinez

http://www.allbusiness.com/services/museums-art-galleries-botanical-zoological/4354778-1.html

http://www.artistsnetwork.com/article/Victor-Martinez-Faces-From-Afar/

http://www.imcm.org/view.asp?ID=24&page=artistmain

Critical Analysis - Canadida Hofer's Scuola Grande Arciconfraternita di San Rocco Venezia

Note from the author: I wrote this in college for an art criticism class.  I have cited my references and hope you will always do that same.  Copyright infringement is NO good.  If you click on the images it will take you to the website I took them from.  Also, please do not use this as your own paper.  Cheating is NO good.

Scuola Grande Arciconfraternita di San Rocco Venezia

            Candida Höfer’s five by seven foot photograph Scuola Grande Arciconfraternita di San Rocco Venezia captures much more than a spectacular shot of an ornate guild hall.  As part of her exhibit Architecture of Absense, this present day museum is empty, allowing the viewer to take in the design and sculpture of the surrounding walls as well as the emptiness of the space.  With grand, rich details this hall makes a statement about the classics.  Jacopo Tintoretto, Vecellio Tiziano, and Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, famous Venetian painters, created the magnificent frescoes that cover the walls.  The marble colonnades and architectural detail date back to early Greek influences.  Through the art’s religious, historical, and artistic qualities, Höfer’s photograph compels the viewer into action.

            Tintoretto, the main artist, completed more than fifty religious frescoes in the hall, hoping to create a spiritual and beautiful touch to the Scuola Grande Arciconfraternita di San Rocco Venezia, or Confraternity of St. Roch.  The confraternity was a lay brotherhood of worship and charity.  Tintoretto, having worked on the frescoes for more than twenty years, provided the confraternity with publicity.  Soon, the confraternity became a shrine to the artist and continues to be unto this day.  Tourists travel to this place to admire Tintoretto’s work and remember the brotherhood who once served in the confraternity.  Value is laid on history and setting of the artwork.  But, perhaps of more importance, is the message trying to be displayed.

When Tintoretto created his frescoes, they were religious in nature.  For centuries frescoes, mosaics, and stain glass were created to inform the average person of religious matter because most could not read or did not possess their own bible.  Portrayed subjects would include the creation of Adam and Eve, biblical stories, the Madonna (or Mary, the mother of Jesus), Jesus’ life and ministry, and also saints of the church.  The artwork’s intent was to educate and create a spiritual connection to the viewer.

            Captured in Höfer’s photograph is the message of worship.  The artwork is religious and leaves a religious, spiritual feeling.  But the grandeur of the artwork receives more focus than the other religious aspects.  The lines of the photographs—created by the walls, ceiling, and floor—point to the central statue of Christ on the cross.  But, unlike the illiterate public of the past, modern people know about Christ and other religious stories.  The artwork does not inform in today’s world; it simply relates the viewer to the time of the artists and their skill. The rich details, humanistic portrayals, and Roman and Greek influences emphasize beauty and idealism.

            Greek influence is definitely prevalent in the Parthenon architectural columns on the back wall.  They also serve as frames for other works of art but they are art themselves.  The tall columns emphasize the power and dominance of Greek culture.  It is Greek culture that all of Western civilization is based.  Roman, Gothic, Renaissance, Medieval, and Baroque periods all learned from Greek philosophy, literature, and art.  Ancient Greece formed the foundation for which all of the following civilizations were built upon.  The three separate columns could represent the trinity of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost.  The sculpture in the center of columns also appears to emerging from within the columns in agreement with emerging from Greece. 

            The modern items in the room like the lights and chairs do not distract from the richness of the room but add to its message.  There are two different lighting fixtures in the room.  One set of fixtures are in the Gothic tradition.  They are caged luminescence shapes.  They look like lanterns and aid the viewer’s eye to the room’s details.  They seem to blend into the background and become part of the architecture.  However, the other set of light fixtures are more modern.  They are bowls of up-cast light that can be viewed as the dishes that once contained the Olympic fire, an event dating back to Ancient Greece.  These lights also aid the eye upward towards the detailed and ornate ceiling design.  The light on the back wall plays a huge role in highlighting the dramatic artwork behind it, giving it more motion and interest.  The viewer can’t help but be drawn to it.  The person depicted on the wall is reaching for the heavens.  It evokes a strong religious feeling.  The lights help reunite different times of Western history—Greek and Gothic—yet they work together to create a lighting aesthetic that draws one’s eyes upward to the art and heaven, emphasizing the artist’s intent.

            The chairs stand out the most in this historical room.  Though the red of the chairs echoes the red paint on the walls, the style of the chairs is what makes them distracting.  The chairs are simple movie director chairs.  They lack decoration and do not have a connection to the past.  So what do these chairs say about the room or the people who visit it?  Why place chairs there at all?  The museum did not place plushy, comfortable, period-aged chairs in this room for a reason.  The art is meant to be looked at closely and appreciatively.  One is not able to look at all the works around them correctly from sitting in a chair.  Different lighting and angles make a difference on how one perceives a piece of art.  Often it is necessary to take in the larger picture. 

Upon closer inspection of the chairs, you will find a backpack and even shadowed figures with crossed legs and books upon their knees.  These ghost-like people are sitting in this room full of wondrous artwork, design, and architecture.  They sit down to ponder the majesty of it all.  But, director’s chairs are not the most comfortable furniture to sit on for extended periods of time. The director’s chairs push the visitors into motion by their lack of comfort. These chairs are often used by movie directors, who make decisions based on their “vision” for the movie they are creating.  Like these directors, the viewers of the hall, who sit in these chairs, form their own decisions and opinions of the artwork based on their personal tastes.  The chairs, the one element that has least to do with the historical context of the room, are the one item that is pushing the viewer into the room, into the past.  This room is not a place to come, relax, and read a good book.  This is a museum, a monument to an incredible past, a past that has shaped our present civilization.  Should not the visitor come to the museum to connect with the past and to gain something from the experience?

            A little off to the left of the center of the photograph there is this ghost-like entity, perhaps representing a group of people who were once in that area looking at the wall but that have moved on.  But, maybe the entity represents the spirits of all who have worked so hard to create art, sculpture, architecture, and a civil society.  The effects they had are still living on and touching the lives of modern day people.  It could be related to the spirit of Elijah.  It turns the hearts of the people to their forefathers, the founders of Western Civilization. 

            Scuola Grande Arciconfraternita di San Rocco Venezia by Candida Höfer is an excellent portrayal of the grand past.  Though her use of lines and light she creates a vibrant feel to the room.  Aspects within it—modern lights and chairs—add to the movement.  The uncomfortable chairs make the visitors rise to their feet and look around and the light makes the eye travel heavenward.  The people, who are vaguely viewed in the photo, are misty and ghost-like.  The room, though old and historic, lives and breathes never leaving a person the same.

The Babylonian Marriage Market by Edwin L Long - Describing What I See

Describing The Babylonian Marriage Market by Edwin L. Long

According to Katelyn Fagan

            Featured in the “Paintings from the Reign of Victoria: The Royal Holloway Collection, London” at Brigham Young University’s Marian Adelaide Morris Cannon Gallery at the Museum of Art is found a painting of historical and political importance.  This painting is The Babylonian Marriage Market by Edwin L. Long.  This rich, colorful, realistic, and historically accurate painting shares a narrative of Babylonian women being sold as wives in a market setting.  There are many wealthy and rich among the crowd, holding elegant fans, wearing costly apparel, and counting their monies.  However, the story told is not from the view point of the bidders vying to win a pretty woman; rather it is the story of the women themselves.  With soft glowing light shining down on them, we see twelve women sitting behind the auction table, on exotic animal skins, waiting in line for their turn to stand on the table in front of all those men.  We see the women’s faces, full of their reactions, doubts, dreams, inhibitions, and fears.  Some are handling the situation more cheerfully than others.  One of these women stares into a mirror, looking down into it, not smiling, not seeing beauty there.  The women who sit there behind the table are of variable looks, from their hair, to their body types, to their facial features.  This painting is about the Victorian ideals of female beauty as well as the current European marriage market that was happening at the time.  This work is a beautiful handling and execution of oil paints, as well as a powerful political and social piece of art for its time as well as now.  

Josiah McElheny - Island Universe Review

Note from the author: I wrote this in college for an art criticism class.  I have cited my references and hope you will always do the same.  Copyright infringement is NO good.  If you click on the images it will take you to the website I took them from.  Also, please do not use this as your own paper.  Cheating is NO good. Thank You.

Josiah McElheny – Island Universe

by Katelyn Fagan

            Josiah McElheny stands apart from his art contemporaries as a trained hands-on artist who puts meaning behind his works.  McElheny is a New York based artist who creates works of beautiful hand blown glass.   His glass objects are alluring, simply because of the fact that they're made of glass.  No matter how humble a drinking glass may be, there's always a mystery to it; because it's solid and transparent, and it's solid and it's fragile.[1] McElheny is an expert glassblower and artist, taking inspirations from books, classic paintings, history, and objects he sees around him.  His latest work Island Universe, 2008, was inspired by the Lobmeyr designed chandeliers seen in the New York Metropolitan Opera House, and adapted to create vivid diagrams of the Big Bang.  The philosophical, religious, and political thought that influenced the production of this piece, and others, make McElheny different than his contemporaries. He reacts to art and culture of both the past and the present.  McElheny’s glassblowing techniques and his stylistic elements create a unique venture from his contemporaries as he turns ideas into productions.

            Josiah McElheny, a MacArthur fellow, went to the Rhode Island School of Design to study photography originally, but the glass department captured his interests more.  He loved the very exclusive, secretive guild community of the glass factory culture, and its long oral preservation and small circle of people who understood its language and methodology.   The production of glass is expensive and difficult, and requires a number of people working together in a sort of apprenticeship tradition.[2]   He went on to study with such glass masters as Ronald Wilkins, Lino Tagliapietra in Italy, and Jan-Erik Ritzman and Sven-Ake Carlsson in Sweden, honing his skills into that of a master. McElheny still prefers making objects himself to enlisting technically brilliant assistants, and he possesses a familiarity with methods that date back centuries. McElheny succeeds in making glass as relevant, as charged with as much intellectual and aesthetic inquiry as any other medium.[3]

McElheny uses his craft as he continues to explore what has become his primary field of interest in recent years: questioning the legacy of Modernism, and probing the very function of art—its use in a world in which our relation to objects is almost exclusively that of consumers rather than of producers.[4]  McElheny exploits the nature of glass, in a true modernist feel in many of his works, by having the viewer contemplate the materialality of the glass—its transparency, reflection, illumination, and emptiness. Some of his stances on Modernism include claiming glass as the ultimate modern material because its nature is transparency and perfection, a twentieth century bigoted idea of being perfect, without differences.  Most of his pieces play on the idea of Modernity, its influence in the past as well as the present.  He himself often follows the Modernist idea that process and materials dictate form.[5]

One of McElheny's real strengths is creating visually enthralling pieces, as well as involving complex ideas about modernity, history, and science.  McElheny integrates thought and action with the voices of many disciplines: sociology, history, philosophy, and psychology. Through his art and the research it entails, he seems to be on an all-encompassing mission—to understand the world and his place in it.[6] Josiah McElheny stated: 

My work is generated from the study of the culture and ideas connected to objects, whether contemporary or antique. I believe that all cultural, physical manifestations are on a continuum. A contemporary art object exists with all the associations we apply to it. And it changes. To be human and alive is to respond to the ideas of others and of yourself and to apply those ideas to the physical world.[7]

His latest work Island Universe proved to be yet another work calling for an in-depth study and research.  This work stems from Hans Harald Rath’s, of the famous Viennese firm J. & L. Lobmeyr, chandeliers in the New York Metropolitan Opera House.  He saw these beautifully crafted chandeliers while at a performance and focused more thought to them than the performance. The chandeliers, just like the theater itself, seemed to have come from this weird transitional moment where Modernism became infected with other influences.[8] This led him to study these magnificent creations.  He learned that the New York Metropolitan Opera House’s architect, Wallace K. Harrison, rejected Rath's initial designs, preferring instead something more space-age. The revised design resulted in these glittering and intricate chandeliers that have a note of distant galaxies and futuristic space stations, but still evoke ornate mansions and gilded opera halls of the past.[9] Ironically these chandeliers were designed in 1965; the year the cosmic microwave background was discovered and provided the crucial evidence needed to back up the Big Bang Theory.  These chandeliers, already looking like a model of the Big Bang, caught McElheny’s attention.  He wanted to remake these chandeliers into eye-level sculptures that would occupy the entire ground floor of the gallery and do so in a streamlined Modernist style—by eliminating their ornate sparkling quality—and incorporate the real science of the Big Bang into them.  He enlisted the help of David Weinberg, an Ohio State University professor of astronomy, to help him research the Big Bang Theory as well as help him incorporate that theory into art.

Together they looked over diagrams of the varying theories, and discussed how a static object could represent the origin of space and time itself, an initiating expansion that occurs everywhere yet has no center.[10]  The origin of the universe, as explored in the Big Bang Theory, holds that it emerged from a state of extremely high temperature and density in an explosive expansion 10 billion to 15 billion years ago.  McElheny told Weinberg that looking to the universe for inspiration led to forms that were stranger, and much more complex and compelling than he could have come up with by mere invention.[11] 

McElheny’s work was to be kinds of explosion of highly reflective chrome-plated aluminum, with a central sphere from which radiate rods of varying lengths.  Each rod ends with either a unique cluster of objects—which include smaller rods topped by hand-formed glass discs and globes—or a single light.[12] In order to convert the chandeliers to a scientifically accurate model, glass pieces would represent galaxies and light bulbs represent quasars, the brightest entities known to exist in the cosmos. To represent the expansive time and nature of the universe, they would use the spatial dimension of the rods emanating from the center where one meter would equal 100 million years after the Big Bang.  The center of the sculpture represents the primordial cosmos and the outer edge the present day, leaving the passage from one to the other to represent the 14 billion year history of the expanding universe.[13]

 

Photograph by Jason Schmidt in New York City 

In their research they ultimately realized that the sculpture could make a correlation between two important things. One is that the history of the Big Bang is just that, a history, and although it is impossible to really draw a picture of the universe at any given moment, it is possible to ask what kinds of basic structures were being formed two, or seven, or ten billion years ago. To artistically represent this, the different arrangements of glass pieces at the end of each rod would show what kinds of galaxy formations were happening at the corresponding length or moment after the Big Bang.  The second thing that the sculpture depicts in terms of science is the beautiful idea of the isotropic nature of the universe, which essentially means that any one place in the universe is just as likely to be as interesting or as boring as any other.  To represent this they made it important that the rods did not come out in some kind of pattern but in a random formation.[14]    

In 2005 after months of collaborating, McElheny created An End to Modernity, a twelve foot high, sixteen feet in diameter sculpture consisting of a central sphere with numerous radiating elements in glass and metal, suspended just above the floor.  It represented the first of five chandeliers that would become part of Island Universe.  This work was commissioned by the Wexner Center Residency Award program and was first exhibited at the Wexner Center for the Arts at Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio.[15]  The collaboration of art and science created a magnificent work of beauty and scientific thought, while addressing the affects of Modernism in the year 1965.

The final result of McElheny and Weinberg’s four-year collaboration is Island Universe. The five sculptures of this work are based on five possible models for the universe—Small Scale Violence, Frozen Structure, Heliocentric, Directional Structure, and Late Emergence—each with its own unique structure. His sculptures offer a three-dimensional map of the "Multiverse," an eternal expansion of possible universes accelerating endlessly into infinity. Along with the sculptures is a 19-minute film Conceptual Drawings for a Chandelier, 1965 where diagrams of the five structures appear.[16] The viewer lies on a giant beanbag to experience an astronomical journey through the Metropolitan Opera House where McElheny’s sculptures are featured, suspended in the black void, accompanied by an eerie soundtrack by composer Paul Schutze, an Australian ambient and electro-acoustic musician.[17] The music and the editing convey a rhythm that shifts, freezes and develops in relation to each model as well as the scientific speculations about other worlds.[18]

The highly reflective yet transparent nature of this piece lures in the viewer, and as he inspects, walks around, and steps towards it, the work changes.  As a viewer, your reflection is found on the center sphere, or the center of the universe.  As McElheny explains: "The central idea in the work is that we're isolated, and that we don't all come from the same place; we have different needs, different histories and different ways of thinking."[19] Many of McElheny’s pieces try to tap into central human questions of who we are and where we come from; what, if anything, is original about us—of our own aspirations in a confusing world, full of endless ideologies and competing influences.[20] “Politically, I’m against finding the single answer,” McElheny insists. “I’m more interested in what these questions mean to our sense of who we are.[21]

            But regardless of how beautifully McElheny’s Island Universe creates a harmonious marriage between science and art, he is not the first glass blower to make scientifically accurate models. In 1936 Leopold and Rudolf Blaschka, father and son partners from Dresden, Germany, completed a collection of 4,400 glass plants and flowers for the Botanical Museum at Harvard University that took a half-century to make. Their studio also made models of marine invertebrates that were sold to museums around the world. Also at the American Museum of Natural History, there is a series of single-celled protozoa completed in 1943 by Herman O. Mueller, a former museum staff member who came from a family of German glass-blowers.[22]

            Josiah McElheny is not the only practicing contemporary art glassblower.  In the Finger Lakes region of New York State is found the Corning Museum of Glass, the world's largest glass museum, featuring thirty-five centuries of glass artistry, and live glassblowing demonstrations. It is also home to the Rakow Research Library, which is the library of record on glass and glassmaking.  It is also home to The Studio, a highly respected glassmaking school.  While this school may not work on the McElheny’s preferred method of European oral tradition and craft, it certainly does an excellent job teaching glassblowing to the masses.  Anyone can take a class, as well as view the museum that is full of rich glass culture and history of past and present artists.[23] Most of the artists featured in this museum work in abstract and organic forms, or mixed media, often not having the same simple-object feel that much of McElheny’s work contains.  A lot of these works are beautiful and intriguing, but take a very different look at what glass can achieve.

One famous glass blower of the 20^th century, Dale Chihuly, focused on the materiality and color that can be achieved through glass blowing. Chihuly was the first American studio glass artist to travel to Murano to observe Venetian glassmaking techniques, which he would bring back to the United States, using them to build the glass program at the Rhode Island School of Design.[24]  McElheny owes much to this famous American glassblower that came before him. 

But, I do believe that Josiah McElheny does offer something different than the others that have come before and those that are his contemporaries.  He does not believe in being original, because all of his work is derived from some previous source, and what he’s doing is re-imagining something or shifting or transforming it slightly but always very much in connection to its source.  He is interested in the past, especially because art is essentially a physical remnant of a moment.[25] His desire is to bring these objects and ideas and contexts into the modern world.  The way in which he does so is by masterfully creating these seductive, reflective pieces that are so attractive to the general public.  He believes that in today’s materialistic society that if something is to be of value then it has to have a kind of gravity and importance to it, or a sense of sumptuousness.  He gets the viewer into his works with his highly or all-reflective objects, because the viewer sees himself in it.  In other ways he tries to create a perfect, pristine utopian feel to his works.[26]

I believe his works accomplish all that McElheny sets out to do concerning his artistic methodologies.  McElheny’s works are intoxicating to look at and to study.  They capture and awe you.  I am greatly impressed with his research and training. Very few artists today seem to care about expertise or craftsmanship, especially those who remove their hands completely from the production process.  I personally think that art has been slandered and defaced by contemporary artists who love pushing the limits of art.  I believe there should be a mastering of craft and skill.  Because of McElheny and other 20^th and 21^st Century glass-blowers, glass-blowing can no longer been seen only as a craft or a trade.  McElheny has emphasized the materiality of glass in a very Greenbergian fashion of Modernism, and done so powerfully. 

Josiah McElheny’s works consist of thought: his thoughts, philosophical thought, scientific thoughts, artistic thoughts, and religious thoughts.  These thoughts not only influenced Island Universe, but every piece made before it and every piece he will continue to make.  This makes him different.  His works are not about “sticking it to the man” or using common everyday materials in new ways just to make art.  He creates legitimate, beautiful, stand alone works that aren’t about making art for art’s sake.  They are about something.  He reacts to art and culture of both the past and present, but does so with a real honed and learned skill.  This makes him unique.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Works Cited

Browne, Alex. "The Big Picture." New York Times, September 26, 2008: MM64.

Corning Museum of Glass. 2009. http://www.cmog.org/dynamic.aspx?id=194 (accessed June 11,

 2009).

White Cube. Josiah McElheny: Island Universe. 2008.

http://www.whitecube.com/exhibitions/josiah_mcelheny_hs/ (accessed June 11, 2009).

Eldrige-Ford, Ashley. Frieze Week 2008: The Gallery Recap - Josiah McElheny, Island Universe

White Cube, London. October 14, 2008.

Http://artcomments.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html (accessed June 11, 2009).

Hixson, Kathryn. "Glass, Apprenticeship, and Josiah McElheney." New Art Examiner, 2001: 72.

Ivatts, Rebecca. "Blowing the glass fantastic." El Pais, 2009: 8.

Art: 21--Art in the Twenty-First Century Season 3, Episode: "Memory". Directed by PBS Home

Programs. Performed by Josiah McElheny. 2005.

Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia. January 28, 2009.

http://www.museoreinasofia.es/exposiciones/expos-pasadas/2009/josiah

mcelheny_en.html (accessed June 11, 2009).

Rothkopf, Scott. "1000 words: Josiah McElheny; Talks about an end to modernity and

conceptual drawing for a chandelier, 1965, both 2005." Artforum International, Nov 2005.

Spears, Dorothy. "The Entire Universe on a Dimmer Switch." New York Times, May 7, 2006:

2.19.

Tarlow, Lois. "Profile: Josiah McElheny." Art New England, Ag/S 2002: 21-23.

Volk, Gregory. "An Infinity of Objects." Art in America, 2006: 166-169.

Weinberg, David. "The glass universe: Where astronomy meets art." New Scientist, Dec 2008:

1-2.

---

[1] Lois Tarlow, "Profile: Josiah McElheny," Art New England, Ag/S 2002: 22

[2]  Lois Tarlow, "Profile: Josiah McElheny," Art New England, Ag/S 2002: 21.

[3] Gregory Volk, "An Infinity of Objects," Art in America, 2006: 166.

[4] Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia,”Josiah McElheny-A Space for an Island Universe,”  January 28, 2009; available from http://www.museoreinasofia.es/exposiciones/expos-pasadas/2009/josiah-mcelheny_en.html Internet;  accessed June 11, 2009).

[5] Kathryn Hixson, "Glass, Apprenticeship, and Josiah McElheney," New Art Examiner, 2001: 72.

[6] Lois Tarlow, "Profile: Josiah McElheny," Art New England, Ag/S 2002: 21.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Scott Rothkopf, "1000 words: Josiah McElheny; Talks about an end to modernity and conceptual drawing for a chandelier, 1965, both 2005," Artforum International, Nov 2005.

[9] Gregory Volk, "An Infinity of Objects," Art in America, 2006: 168

[10] David Weinberg, "The glass universe: Where astronomy meets art." New Scientist, Dec 2008: 1.

[11]Rebecca Ivatts, "Blowing the glass fantastic," El Pais, 2009: 8.

[12] White Cube, Josiah McElheny: Island Universe, 2008; Available at http://www.whitecube.com/exhibitions/josiah_mcelheny_hs/; Internet; accessed June 11, 2009.

[13] David Weinberg, "The glass universe: Where astronomy meets art," New Scientist, Dec 2008: 1.

[14] Scott Rothkopf, "1000 words: Josiah McElheny; Talks about an end to modernity and conceptual drawing for a chandelier, 1965, both 2005," Artforum International, Nov 2005.

[15] Gregory Volk, "An Infinity of Objects," Art in America, 2006: 168

[16] Rebecca Ivatts, "Blowing the glass fantastic," El Pais, 2009: 8.

[17] Ashley Eldrige-Ford, Frieze Week 2008: The Gallery Recap - Josiah McElheny, Island Universe White Cube, London,  October 14, 2008; Available at http://artcomments.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html; Internet;  accessed June 11, 2009.

[18] White Cube, Josiah McElheny: Island Universe, 2008; Available at http://www.whitecube.com/exhibitions/josiah_mcelheny_hs/; Internet; accessed June 11, 2009.

[19] Ivatts, “Blowing the glass fantastic,” 9

[20] Gregory Volk, "An Infinity of Objects," Art in America, 2006: 169

[21] Alex Browne, "The Big Picture," New York Times, September 26, 2008: MM64.

[22] Dorothy Spears, "The Entire Universe on a Dimmer Switch," New York Times, May 7, 2006: 2.19.

[23] Corning Museum of Glass, 2009, “Ben W. Heineman Sr. Family Gallery of Contemporary Glass”; available at http://www.cmog.org/dynamic.aspx?id=194 ; Internet accessed  June 11, 2009.

[24] Corning Museum of Glass, 2009, “Ben W. Heineman Sr. Family Gallery of Contemporary Glass”; available at http://www.cmog.org/dynamic.aspx?id=194 ; Internet accessed  June 11, 2009.

[25] Art: 21--Art in the Twenty-First Century Season 3, Episode: "Memory," Directed by PBS Home Programs; performed by Josiah McElheny, 2005.

[26] Art: 21--Art in the Twenty-First Century Season 3, Episode: "Memory," Directed by PBS Home Programs; performed by Josiah McElheny, 2005.