Voice of Fire: Are we over this yet?

Twenty years ago a painting by Barnett Newman ignited a firestorm in Canada

by John Geddes on Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:40am - 21 Comments

The boundary-pushing young curator behind the Flavin show was Hamilton, Ont., native Brydon Smith. He would rise to be the National Gallery’s chief curator, a major shaper of its 20th-century collection. It was Smith who, in 1987, visited Newman’s widow, Annalee, to begin negotiating first to borrow and then buy Voice. Actually, negotiate isn’t the right word. In an interview, Smith couldn’t repress a long chuckle when asked how they came to terms. “Annalee said to me, ‘You know about the market, you tell me what the value is,’ ” he recalled. “So I basically set the price.”

Bourgeois Bust: Jeff and Ilona, by Jeff Koons, 1991

Bourgeois Bust: Jeff and Ilona, by Jeff Koons, 1991

Retired for the most part now at 71, but still curating the occasional small show from his Ottawa home, Smith brushed off any further talk of money by saying he doesn’t keep up with art prices anymore. His reticence can’t be out of any misgivings over the deal he struck on behalf of the Canadian taxpayer. Prices for major American postwar abstract painters have soared. Consider that a small ink-on-paper work by Newman—in austere grey and black—sold for more than $5 million (U.S.) at auction in 2008.

If the fuss over the price seems quaint in hindsight, the deeper question—can three stripes, no matter how monumentally presented, be considered an important creation?—is not so easily dismissed. After a lifetime spent championing abstract art, and hunting down major examples of it for Canada’s national collection, Smith still considers the question respectfully. By way of an answer, he turns to explaining how he worked closely with architect Moshe Safdie on designing the interior spaces of the National Gallery’s new glass-and-granite building before it opened in 1988. A large, high room on the second level needed an assertive anchor. “It occurred to me,” Smith says, “that there was one work of art I knew that would fit and hold that space.”

He was right. Gallery C214 is 24 m long and nearly half that wide; its walls rise almost 12 m to where the ceiling begins sloping upward from either side toward a room-length skylight. The space brings to mind a church, and Voice flies solo at one end, soaring where stained glass might be. Arrayed around the room with plenty of space to breathe are a few choice American abstracts, some of Smith’s plum acquisitions, including a Jackson Pollock, a Mark Rothko, and one of Newman’s stark steel sculptures. For fans of modernism, it’s a wondrous assemblage.

For scoffers, it’s an equally grand place to fume, although perhaps not quite so inviting as a much smaller room just down the hall. There the gallery-goer finds a complete set of Marcel Duchamp’s so-called “readymades,” including the infamous bicycle wheel attached to a wooden stool. An ordinary store-bought snow shovel hangs framed by the room’s main entrance—much as Voice does so nearby—for dramatic effect.

A snow shovel is art? It’s enough to make Voice look like it belongs with the Group of Sevens. By the way, the gallery’s purchase of Duchamp’s readymades was negotiated 40 years ago this year by the young Brydon Smith.

Bookmark and Share
  • sbt

    This was probably the best 1.8 million ever spent on art in this country. And I say that as someone who still has trouble calling three lines art. I really can't tell you what other art is in any Canadian museums but I'd recognize this one in a heartbeat. Well, this and the meatdress.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/YSP YSP

      From a strictly business investment viewpoint, the VoF has been unbeatable. (If only my retirement funds had done so well . . .)

      ****** WARNING: LEFTY INTELLECTUAL ARTSY OPINION ALERT *******
      I haven't been to the NG for six years or so, but I thought the VoC was dwarfed in impact by the Pollock glass, sand & paint piece in the same room. I'm not a big AE fan to begin with, and while I don't have a problem with the National Gallery showcasing this type of work, the amount of gallery space & attention given to these works dwarfs that given to the Canadian works such as the G7, Les Automatistes, Emily Carr, the contemporary Inuit artists, etc, reflecting a curational philosophy that promoted the idea that Canadian ideas were limited to colonial offshoots of European & American ideas of the previous generation (eg, see Group of Seven. But that's a rant for another day.) It is supposed to be the NATIONAL Gallery of CANADA, after all, but I guess it's in the capital & we can't risk offending the delicate sensibilities of the embassy crowd.

    • Lincoln

      I might agree with you if they had not hung it upside down, thereby making it difficult to interpret..

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

    Great piece.

    Gallery C214 is 24 m long and nearly half that wide; its walls rise almost 12 m to where the ceiling begins sloping upward from either side toward a room-length skylight. The space brings to mind a church, and Voice flies solo at one end, soaring where stained glass might be.

    A great space. The effect of which, for Voice of Fire, is significantly attenuated by the fact that the gallery has placed one of those stupid little "please don't walk straight into the painting" ropes in front of the thing (visible in the picture here)! As though anybody is going to try observing Voice of Fire from millimetres away! Please, National Gallery, consult your aesthetic sense and remove that ridiculous, ugly rope.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

      At first look at the photo here, I thought that was a horizontal metal bar that was part of the artwork; the shadow cast being part of the effect. It made my imagination work to find meaning. I became even more thoughtful when I had to look at just the painting.

      I like how the curator was looking even beyond the painting itself as the "art", but the space it was placed in. Depends on your perspective. Guess standing two feet from it would would make you think even differently.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/YSP YSP

        That's a very post-modern approach. I'm not sure it's appropriate for a modernist Abstract Expressionist work. It's about the purity and strength of the idea. Surroundings are irrelevant. (And resistance is futile.) I believe you're simply supposed to bow down and worship it's Superiority; hence its placement in the most cathedral-esque room.

  • Mark Radke

    I love Voice of Fire and visit it whenever I am in Ottawa.

  • Non-partisan

    Whenever I hear some rube respond to a work of art (usually visual, but not always) with the dismissive retort (*I* could have done THAT), I always recall my grade 12 English professor's equally pithy response – "perhaps… but you didn't."

    • Peter

      Hmm, so you're saying that doing something "first" is somehow relevant to whether that something should be considered art (even "great" art)? There must have been a first person to randomly spread vomit and/or menstrual blood on a canvas but I say that person wasn't an artist, just sick in the head… or possibly a really REALLY cynical self-promoter (along the lines of Newman), who knows.

  • Dave

    Twenty years later, and the much bigger-budget Maman has elicited nothing but smiles.

    It's also a great landmark. "Yeah, just turn left at the giant metal spider."

  • John D

    Maman is fantastic, and I hate spiders, but it really does get people talking.

  • bert

    Art-my foot. A waste of public funds at best. But then those so call art lovers are in reality just trying to justify their existance. No public funds should be spent on art or sports. They should be able to stand on their own 2 feet without tax dollars. If arts and sports can not exist without tax money then they are not a priority to the general public. This is one area of society that be governed by user pays.

  • TedTylerEzro

    I'm generally against funding bureaucracy inspired culture at the best of times.

    But then those who think this is a good investment probably find my culture repugnant too. I just wish they'd pay for theirs like I pay for mine.

  • wafer

    Voice of Fire, what a joke, waste of money and insult to Canadians. Is it any wonder most Canadians could not care less about government funding for Arts and Culture. If anything, this so called painting serves still today as the justification and benchmark for most to point out that giving money to artists is an affront to the hard working taxpayers of Canada. Arts folk who want to be taken seriously and have their work appreciated should be speaking out against crap such as this instead of defending it, which serves only to dimish their public perception.

  • JimD

    Hahah. Most art is over-valued this one is nothing compared to the crap churned out by Damien Hirst that goes for millions.

    The only time I ever visted the National Gallery was with my younger brother, after we'd come off a bender in Montreal the night before and had to sleep in the cab of my Ford Ranger because we couldn't find a hotel room. Needless to say we likely weren't the most presentable pair. My brother is in the military and not at all artsy. His first reaction to the VoC was one of incredulity, something like "What the hell is that supposed to be?" When I told him how much they paid for it, it was all I could do to convince him from walking out.

    • Mary-Lou

      Hey JimD.

      Have your brother take another look at it. I tried it with the picture above and it works here too. It does hurt your eyes somewhat, but you have to keep them open and keep staring at it. Eventually the red band repeats itself and creates a shadow on the blue bands. Then the red band starts to wiggle slowly like a burning flame. It's really cool in person with the real thing. I like the painting and I think Canadians in general, love or hate it, still like to talk about it.

  • Atomic Walrus

    The root of the controversy is less the artistic merit of the piece than the source of the funds used to purchase it. The worth of art tends to be subjective. The use of public funds commits every taxpayer to the purchase, irrespective of their opinion. The same sort of argument could be made regarding public funding of sports. The sensible approach would be one of "put up or shut up": the government makes it easy for supporters of different types of public discourse to fund their activities, on the condition that the supporters provide the funds themselves.

  • http://www.matthewbproman.com/ John Proman

    I totally agree with you guys. I'm a lover of art myself. And if that painting worth far more I wouldn't be amazed.

  • http://www.premieresapconsultants.com/BW_Consulting.html Business Warehouse

    Doing the right thing is always the right thing, get it?

  • Candace

    This is a simple optical illusion, so what if it's gigantic? Does size somehow justify a price tag of $1.8 million? I don't think so. Any person with about a thousand dollars who knows how to use measuring tape and a straight-edge could do an EXACT copy of this piece within a day or two, which would have the EXACT same visual impact. Hence, the government essentially spent nearly two million dollars of taxpayer funds just on that hack Newman's name. What a waste.

  • Dina

    A cool $1.8 mill, just a TAD OUTRAGEOUS.
    Don't most intelligent Canadians think the same??

    I live in Thunder Bay Ontario.
    Our brand new state of the art hospital was finally finished except for that little bit of construction going on outside of the hospital.

    Well turns out that it was finished.
    It is a cool million dollar piece of art work.
    Art work my ass.

    It is ugly, depressing gray, & looms over the hospital.
    When I see it, almost makes me feel like it is going to abduct some one.
    Ya like U.F.O. stuff.
    When I inquired about THIS GREAT ART WORK,
    and what a waste of money it was.
    I was told that great art work is proven to make people heal & feel better.
    The only way to get the true appreciation of it was from a helicopter.
    That's right folks,
    rent a helicopter & see this amazing art.
    Not like the garbled, depressing metal from out side the hospital,
    but if you rent a helicoptor & fly over it.
    Well supposedly it is incredible & will speed up your healing time.
    Also keep your spirits feeling wonderful.
    OK lets see I can't afford to buy food once a month,
    {oh ya I'm one of those bums on disability, I am truly sorry for having a cyst on my brain & spine.}
    I guess it's going to have to be once every 2 months.
    Than maybe I can rent a helicoptor to see the beauty of this work of art.
    What B.S.
    What damn committee or board of directors for the hospita,
    or who ever the hell it would be,
    can gave any one a half descent reason why all that money was wasted on a massive piece of junk.

    When commities say we the people have a vote, as well as opinions.
    When are those meetings scheduled?
    I seem to keep missing them.

    Signed one very annouyed person,
    would of liked to have seen $1 million go to research that just might keep a few people alive some day.

    Dina McCabe
    Thunder Bay, Ontario

From Macleans