Skip to main content

Full text of "Six more : an exhibition at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art July 24 - August 25, 1963"

See other formats


5 0715 01108811 1 





JULY 24-AUGUST 25 1963 


Warren M. Dorn, 
Frank G. Bonelli 
Burton W. Chase 

Ernest E. Debs 

Kenneth Hahn 

Lindon S. Hollinger, 

Chief Administrative Officer 


Board of Trustees 

Edward W. Carter, President 

Howard E Ahmanson 

David E. Bright 

Sidney E Brody 

Richard F. Brown 

Justin Dart 

Charles E. Ducommun 

C. V. Duff 

John Jewett Garland 

Mrs. Freeman Gates 

Ed N. Harrison 

David W. Hearst 

Roger W. Jessup 

Joseph B. Koepfli 

Mrs. Rudolph Liebig 

Maurice A. Machris 

Charles O. Matcham 

Dr. Franklin D. Murphy 

John R. Pemberton 

A. Raborn Phillips, Jr. 

Vincent Price 

John R. Rex 

Willian T. Sesnon, Jr. 

William J. Sheffler 

Norton Simon 

Mrs. Kellogg Spear 

Maynard Toll 

Dr. Ruf us B. von Kleinsmid 

Mrs. Stuart E. Weaver, Jr. 

Dr. M. Norvel Young 

Executive Committee of the 
Contemporary Art Council 

Gifford Phillips 


Frederick R. Weisman 

Vice President 

Mrs. Stanley Freeman 


Harry Sherwood 


Dr. Nathan Alpers 

Mrs. Leonard Asher 

Michael Blankfort 

Donald Factor 

Mrs. Melvin Hirsh 

Melvin Hirsh 

Mrs. Michael Levee, Jr. 

Michael Levee, Jr. 

Mrs. Gifford Phillips 

Mrs. John Rex 

Mrs. Henry C. Rogers 

Henry C. Rogers 

Taft Schreiber 

Mrs. Harry Sherwood 

Richard Sherwood 

Milton Sperling 

Donald Winston 

James Elliott, ex officio 



The exhibition six more includes paintings by artists working in Cali- 
fornia and was conceived for simultaneous presentation here with SIX 
PAINTERS AND THE OBJECT, an exhibition in which all of the paintings 
were done by artists working in or near New York. The two exhibitions 
were selected by Lawrence Alloway, Curator of the Solomon R. Guggen- 
heim Museum, where Six painters and the object was shown earlier 
in the year. In choosing the artists to be represented in each exhibition, 
Mr. Alloway used the same principle of stressing pop art painting and 
omitting object makers for reasons he has outlined in the introduction to 
the catalog of the New York exhibition. The resulting combination of exhi- 
bitions provides then a sensitive and well-reasoned survey and a compari- 
son of pop art painting on the East and West Coasts. 

The Contemporary Art Council of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 
the sponsor of both exhibitions in Los Angeles, was organized about two 
years ago to encourage and help support a contemporary art program 
within the Museum's overall historical program. With an aim stated in its 
by-laws of "giving particular attention to the evolution of new forms and 
conceptions in the work of living artists and their immediate antecedents," 
the program carried out under the Contemporary Art Council's sponsor- 
ship has included six exhibitions and has made possible important 
advances in the Museum's educational activities and in the acquisition of 
works for the permanent collection. 

On behalf of the Council I would like to express appreciation to the artists, 
collectors and galleries listed on the following page for their generous 
cooperation in lending works for the exhibition. james Elliott 

lenders to the exhibition 

The Ahrams Family Collection, New York; The L. M. Asher Family, Los 
Angeles; Leo Castelli, N'ew York; Mr. and Mrs. Donald Factor, Beverly 
Hills; Mr. and Mrs. Monte Factor, Los Angeles; Phillip Hefferton, Los 
Angeles; Mr. and Mrs. Walter Hopps, Pasadena; Mr. and Mrs. Robert 
Kelly, Sacramento ; Mr. and Mrs. Steven Paine, Boston; Melvin Ramos, 
Sacramento ; Mr. and Mrs. Alan Slifka, New York; Mr. and Mrs. Allan 
Stone, Neiv York; Wayne Thiebaud, Sacramento ; Dr. Leopold Tuchman, 
Beverly Hills. 

Leo Castelli Gallery, New York; Fergus Gallery, Los Angeles; Rolf Nelson 
Gallery, Los Angeles; Allan Stone Gallery, Neiv York. 

SIX more lawrence alloway 

This exhibition is devoted to painters, not object-makers, and it is as neces- 
sary to make this distinction on the West Coast as it is on the East Coast. 
There has been a tendency to confuse object-makers with the painters who 
use known signs and common objects. To summarize the differences very 
quickly, however. West Coast object-makers are concerned with delapida- 
tion (both of artifacts and of images of the human figure) and with the 
evocation of disaster. Toys are treated as the monuments of a decHning 
civilization and dolls simulate rapes and mutilations. Twin threads of 
American Gothic (Poe) and of social protest are present. The family vault 
of the Ushers is, in this compound, blended with fall-out shelters ; family 
curses with the human condition. Characteristically West Coast object- 
makers exhort the spectator while, at the same time, their works seem 
to subside in decays The painters in this exhibition, however, work in 
another way, avoiding nostalgia and anger ; the supermarket or Pacific 
Ocean Park rather than the crypt or the junk shop is their scene. 

In one way or another, mass communications provide subject matter for 
these painters. It is not that they expect to reach a mass audience ; 
obviously their audience is the same as the audience for art. In New York, 
for instance, Andy Warhol may paint Troy Donahue, but his work is not 
distributed like Troy's movies nor seen by the readers of the fan magazines 
that Troy appears in. Warhol is, like any artist, shown in a gallery, bought 
by art collectors, not teen-agers, and written about by art critics, and not 
by Hedda Hopper. What has happened is that independently and simul- 
taneously various painters extended their choice of subject-matter to 
include the dimension of heroes, signs, and objects that they have in 
common with other Americans. Until recently, the mass media have not 
been accepted by artists as a usable part of their environment. The main 
approaches to the subject have been Marxist, Freudian, or sociological. 
(1) To the Marxist the mass media are intended to drug the minds of the 
masses (you and me) with vitiating dreams ; (2) to the Freudian the mass 
media are receptacles of antique fantasy; and (3) to the sociologist the 
media are an index of hidden assumptions and shifting opinion. It is worth 
recording, in view of the cultural inertia which attracts art critics to the 

Wayne Thiebaud 

34. JAWBREAKER MACHINE. 26" x 3iy2' 
Lent by Allan Stone Gallery, New York. 

first two of these approaches, that the decision by artists to approach the 
mass media objectively, in a spirit of acceptance, called for originality and 
rigour, opposing the habits and reflexes of both American and European 

Pop art, as the tendency looks like being called for a while, has been con- 
sistently misunderstood by its critics and, maybe, by those who like it. 
It is often represented as antithetical to abstract art, and sometimes as its 
heir. It is true that connections that can be made, for instance, between the 
large single color fields of Barnett Newman and those of Joe Goode and 
Edward Ruscha in this exhibition (and with Jim Dine in New York, of 
course). This does not mean, however, that the strength of pop art derives 
simply from one preceding style. A common error is involved here, which 
consists in assuming that there is one main, correct, proper style at any 
One historical moment. If you think that only abstract or expressionistic 
art has the sanction of history, pop art seems to be an invader or a distrac- 
tion. In fact, this monolithic view is untenable in historical terms. The 
fact is, modern artists exist in a situation of multiple choice ; each artist 
is faced with various possibilities, of equal historical availability. The 
spectrum of choice includes abstract art, of various kinds, and pop art, of 
various kinds, and everything else. At least since 1870, multiple styles have 
co-existed in European and American art and, apart from giving comfort 
to obsessively tidy critics and historians, there is no reason to reduce the 
choice. Artists who are hermits and artists who are propagandists 
co-exist ; downtown and uptown, are equally possible places. 

By using signs and objects from the man-made environment, pop artists 
are evoking that part of the culture that we all share, and have all grown 
up with. It is our only universal culture and, as such, it is likely to be 
attached to personal and compelling experiences. At the same time, the 
mass media offer a huge vocabulary of visual communications that are 
vivid in color and spatially flat. It is formally convenient as well as 
humanly rich. Thus, the media offer artists a way of handling a rich sub- 
ject matter, rooted in our experience of the urban environment- , but 
without loss of the autonomy of the flat picture plane. 

Looking back at wayne thiebaud's early work, it is possible to detect 
elements in which his later development, as a laureate of lunch counters 
and diners, is implicit. In the early 50's, his still-lives of trophies bunched 
very similar objects together. Around 1954 he painted a cigar counter 
frontally, the display of regular forms identified with the format of the 
painting ; probably in the following year he painted the portrait of a one- 
armed bandit and a close-up of a jewelry tree display-stand. His forms 
were ornate and spiky, the surface metallic and corrugated; the orna- 
mental excitement obscured the emerging subject matter. Throughout the 
50's he progressively soothed the paint surface and curbed his quirky 
linearism until, in 1961, he achieved, in the first of his pie paintings, sim- 
plicity and, to quote the artist, the "isolation of the objects." 

Still-life painting has, traditionally, celebrated unique works of crafts- 
manship, as in Chardin's copper pans and china bowls, or the personal 
arrangement of plates and food, as in Bonnard's domestic table settings. 
Thiebaud, though basically a still-life painter, extends the genre to include 
slices of cake, in assembly line rows, or sandwiches like cars in a parking 
lot. It is the impersonality and repetition of objects that Thiebaud paints, 
samples of the anonymous, continuous highway culture that crosses the 
United States. The reassurance of standardization, its stability in a mobile 
environment, is his theme and not, as socially-minded gourmet art critics 
have suggested, the decline of American food. 

The familiarity of the objects he paints— it is the same as the food ive eat, 
at least some of the time— should not obscure recognition of the formal 
properties of Thiebaud's work. The formal elements do not act as a grid, 
within which his objects are arranged, like chessmen ; nor are the objects 
merely the pretext (as Roger Fry proposed of Cezanne's skulls) for an 
exercise in design. On the contrary, Thiebaud fuses the subject matter 
with the formal means. He has written of his interest in "what happens 
when the relationship between paint and subject matter comes as close as 
I can get it— white, gooey, shiny, sticky oil paint spread out on the top of 
a painted cake to 'become' frosting. It is playing with reality— making an 
illusion which grows out of an exploration of the propensities of mate- 

Melvin Ramos 

16. CRIME BUSTER. 30" x 26". 

Lent by the Abrams Family Collection, New York 

rials. "^ He uses paint, too, in such a way as to suggest the clear light of a 
store or lunch counter, with the color of the goods spreading and leaking 
into the background. 

MEL RAMOS, like Roy Lichtenstein, uses comic book sources, but where 
Lichtenstein paints episodes, as evocative as thematic apperception tests 
when isolated from the narrative flow, Ramos paints portraits. In 1962 
he painted a series of heroes from costume comics (Batman, Superman, 
the Atom), and, in 1963, he turned from male to female figures to paint a 
series of sex queens. These atheltic and erotic girls (Fantomah, Camilla, 
and Glory Forbes- Vigilante) , are taken from pre-Code comic books, which 
are now collectors' items. In a statement dated April, 1963, Ramos writes : 
"I paint portraits of romantic heroes. There is no mystery about these 
heroes— they are a tradition. American folk heroes are imbued with a 
nostalgic romance that makes it difl^cult for us not to identify with them . . . 
When they are taken out of context the symbolic reference becomes sub- 
merged and the image asserts itself. I try to celebrate folk heroes and sex 
queens in a straight-forward manner ... While their likeness is not faith- 
ful, their character is obvious. The 'clever handling' is deliberate, not 
because I particularly like technical virtuosity but to reinforce the image, 
sustain the formal structure, or to instill a quality of heraldic elegance." 

His figures combine elements of the plastic (rounded three-dimensional 
forms) with the heraldic (inscriptions, frames, flat color). The result is 
figures that are plastically real but, at the same time, locked in the popular 
conventions in which they originated. Whereas Thiebaud makes paint a 
metaphor of substance and light, Ramos raises problems about the process 
of representation itself. Prior to using comic book sources, Ramos' works 
were thickly-painted figures in daily clothes or in striped bathing cos- 
tumes, bulky and emphatically three-dimensional. When he quit painting 
Clark Kent and turned to Superman, he was forced to incorporate, into 
the dense medium of paint, the streamlined drawing of the comics, with 
their summary foreshortenings and diagrammatic anatomies. The stream- 
lined drawing of linear originals intermeshes with the modelling in light 
and shade ; painterly handling ripples through the heraldic schema. 

Billy Al Bengston 

4. TROY. 60" X 60". 

Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Donald Factor, Beverly Hills 

Clearly, all the artists in this exhibition are distinct individuals, with 
styles of their own, and belonging to several milieus that do not overlap. 
The use of the mass media that they have in common, however, is suf- 
ficiently general to allow them to be grouped together, without implying 
any united movement. There is, perhaps, a formal characteristic shared 
by most of the artists, though one which is wide open to personal variation. 
The combination of flatness with signs indicating things in the world 
(words, trademarks, objects, currency) leads to a kind of pictorial struc- 
ture that might be called emblematic. In the emblem traditionally words 
and a visual image mutually re-enforced each other to make an amalgam 
of moral point. The emblems of these painters combine references to the 
world, by means of pre-existing signs, with new formal layouts of great 
density and vigour. The flat and the significative are fused. (The "heraldic" 
elements in Ramos' work are analogous to this definition of the emblem.) 

BILLY AL bengston's paintings are symmetrical, concentric displays which 
expand, in subtle pictorial activity, around central signs. He has used in 
his paintings, to quote the Motorcyclist, "such items as the license plate, 
the BSA nameplate in several difl'erent interpretations and the cylinder 
head, complete right down to the pink spark plug insulator (a Lodge 
exclusive feature)."* Bengston's paintings are not restricted to refer- 
ences of this kind, but the catching of common signs and objects in webs 
of systematic formality and of glowing color is constant in his work. It 
can be seen in his big heart series of 1961, like exuberant Valentines of a 
hot-rod coach painter, and in his paintings of a centrally silhouetted iris 
surrounded by checkerboard patterns. The painting partly carries a 
familiar image and partly subdues it, as the new form of the painting 
takes precedence over the pre-existing image. Recognition and unf amiliar- 
ity oscillate in the painting. The work, however, is never wholly non- 
figurative, which is why the term emblem may be appropriate. 

EDWARD RUSCHA has anticipated and dismissed one of the explanations for 
using the man-made environment as subject-matter. "Most important, I 
do not paint to prove that 'there is no poor subject'," he wrote in a journal. 
A book of photographs by Ruscha, Tiventij-six Gasoline Stations'', and 

Edward Ruscha 

24. ANNIE. 71" X 661/2". 

Lent by the L. M. Asher Family, Los Angeles 

consisting exactly of that, records the subject without sociological interest 
(no generalizations in store) and without the melancholy of Edward 
Hopper (whose gas station is as fraught with morality as a Charles 
Dickens' house). Ruscha, in his painting, uses typography to create mas- 
sive images of words : "Boss," Noise," "Annie," "Honk." It is as if a bill- 
board designer were to work with the chaste reticence of a funerary 
mason. Each word that Ruscha uses is known to us, and connects with 
knowledge that we have ; at the same time, the word is denied the syntax 
or the context that confers meaning. An isolated word is a unit of lan- 
guage, but denied any instructions we do not know how to take it. Annie: 
a girl-friend, little Orphan Annie, Annie Laurie, Annie Get Your Gun? In 
Honk, the letters are differentiated by progressive textural change, but 
we cannot, finally, pretend, that it not a word and just an abstract sequence 
of forms. Ruscha's paintings are emblems, with verbal and pictorial mean- 
ings jointly suspended. They refer, as much pop art painting does, to the 
process of communication itself; common words become cryptic in the 
clear light of day and without any mystification. 

In the nineteenth century frompe VoeU artists who painted facsimilies of 
dollar bills were investigated as potential forgers by the federal authori- 
ties. This should not happen to Phillip hefferton however, for though 
his subject is the currency, he enlarges it to a vast scale, often painting- 
only details, and radically transforms it even while he is quoting. With 
American bills of various amounts he knows that money talks, that money 
can be everything. He takes Washington's, or Jackson's, or Hamilton's, or 
Lincoln's likeness, which he distends or otherwise changes. Money is the 
root of all images : portrait heads, baroque ornament, and landscapes, like 
the view of the U.S. Treasury with the stately automobile in the fore- 
ground on the back of the $10 bill. In his mad money the signature of the 
treasurer suddenly becomes "Hefferton." Personal reference and exuber- 
ant jokes riddle the paper money. The residual Baroque features of the 
bills, blown up by Hefferton, reveal a ripe full rhythm which the free 
brushwork increases. The surface of the paintings is rugged and negli- 
gent, with the rough, loose brushwork approximating to the original line 

jnnjjTDinTnTTnnnmi iim mismTiTTi-niTTmTrrnTTfmTrrr^^ 



u 1 1 lilt i uiiiiJiiiiiiiiii iii aniiMiTi^ mil 


Phillip Hefferton 11. SINKING GEORGE. 90" x 67y2". 

Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Monte Factor, Los Angeles 

engraving of the bills. 

JOE GOODE, alone of the artists in this exhibition, uses objects in addition 
to his painted canvases. The canvas, always one color, painted rather 
ripely, is responsive, as large areas of single color must be, to color changes 
in the spectator's eye and to light changes that produce gradations of light 
and shadow. The object, painted the same color as the canvas, with an 
assigned place on a shelf built at the base of the canvas is always a milk 
bottle. It is inevitable that we read the canvas as a wall ; on the other hand, 
it is possible to read the bottle as a kind of knot of color, projected for- 
ward, out in space, but in color and texture bound to the canvas surface. 
Thus the object is and is not a milk bottle and the canvas is and is not, a 

Paradoxes of representation, the play of levels of signification, are at the 
heart of this kind of painting. The artist is engaged both in making legible 
references to external objects and in achieving satisfactory internal for- 
mality. The issue of this double impulse is signs that are problematic and 
complex, as subtle, for all their references to mass communications, as art 
that refers to more respected sources. 


1. For West Coast object-makers, see: Arthur Secunda on Edward Keinholz, Artforiim 
I, No. 5, 1962; Philip Leider on Bruce Connor: "A New Sensibility," Artforum I, 
No. 6, 1962. For George Herms see William Seitz, The Art of Assemblage, Museum of 
Modern Art, 1961. For a painter analogous to the object-makers, see John Coplans on 
Llyn Foulkes, "3 Los Angeles Artists," Artforum I, No. 10, 1963. 

2. There is a covert bias in a great deal of twentieth century art opinion against urban 
subject-matter. The timeless or the eternal, and the prestige that goes along with the 
transcendence of topicality, underlies much current formal art criticism. Pop art, 
though it has a sufficient formality, makes no secret of its temporal existence. In this 
respect it is in line with Italian Futurism (townscape as hectic simultaneity), Dada 
(communication as fragmented profusion), and French Purism (mass produced 
articles used as still-life objects), as pro-urban and anti-idealist. 

3. Wayne Thiebaud; "Is a Lollypop Tree Worth Painting?", San Francisco Sundaij 
ChroJiicle, July 15, 1962. 

4. "Brush-Strokes of a 4-Stroke," Motorcyclist, 772, February, 1962. 

5. Edward Ruscha; Twenty-six Gasoline Stations, Alhambra, California, 1963. 

Joseph Goode 

6. HAPPY BIRTHDAY. 16"x66W. 

Lent by Rolf Nelson Gallery, Los Angeles 

six more: works in the exhibition 

billy al bengston 

Joseph goode 

phillip hefferton 

melvin ramos 

1. BIG HOLLYWOOD. 1960. Oil on canvas, 78" x 90". 
Lent by Ferus Gallery, Los Angeles. 

2. GAS TANK AND TACHOMETER 2. 1961. Oil on canvas, 
42" X 40". Le7it by Fe)-us Gallery, Los Angeles. 

3. BUSTER. 1962. Oil and oil lacquer on masonite, 60 " x 60". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Walter Hopps, Pasadena. 

4. TROY*. 1962. Oil and oil lacquer on masonite, 60" x 60". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Donald Factor, Beverly Hills, 

5. STERLING. 1963. Oil and oil lacquer on masonite, 

60" X 60". Lent by the L. M. Asher Family, Los Angeles. 

6. HAPPY BIRTHDAY*. 1962. Oil on canvas and milk bottle, 
76" X 66W. Lent by Rolf Nelson Gallery, Los Angeles. 

7. ONE YEAR OLD. 1962. Oil on canvas and milk bottle, 
66%" X 67". Lent by Rolf Nelson Gallery, Los Angeles. 

8. PURPLE. 1962. Oil on canvas and milk bottle, 68" x 66". 
Lent by Rolf Nelson Gallery, Los Angeles. 

9. LEROY. 1963. Oil on canvas and milk bottles, 84" x 132". 
Lent by Rolf Nelson Gallery, Los Angeles. 

10. HEFFERTON. 1962. Oil on canvas, 48" x 96". 
Lent by the artist. 

11. SINKING GEORGE*. 1962. Oil on canvas, 90" x 67y2". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Monte Factor, Los Angeles. 

12. WINKIN' LINCOLN. 1962. Oil on canvas, 96" x 66". 
Lent by the artist. 

13. LINCOLN MEMORIAL. 1963. Oil on canvas, 68" diameter. 
Lent by the artist. 

14. TREASURY BUILDING. 1963. Oil on canvas, 67-''4" diameter. 
Lent by the artist. 

15. THE ATOM. 1962. Oil on canvas, 50" x 44". 
Lent by Wayne Thiebaud, Sacramento. 

16. CRIME BUSTER*. 1962. Oil on canvas, 30" x 26". 

Leyit by the Abrams Family Collection, New York. 

17. THE JOKER. 1962. Oil on canvas, 11" x 10". 
Lent anonymously. 

18. CAMILLA, QUEEN OF THE JUNGLE. 1963. Oil on canvas, 
30" X 26". Lent by Leo Castelli, New York. 

edward ruscha 

wayne thiebaud 

19. FANTOMAH. 1963. Oil on canvas, 40" x 36". 
Lent hy Leo Castelli Gallery, New York. 

20. FUTURA. 1963. Oil on canvas, 58" x 44". 
Lent by the artist. 

21. GLORY FORBES VIGILANTE. 1963. Oil on canvas, 40" x 40" 
Lent by the artist. 

22. UNTITLED. 1961. Oil on canvas, 72" x 67". 
Lent by Ferns Gallery, Los Angeles. 

23. UNTITLED. 1961-62. Oil on canvas, 72" x 67". 
Lent by Ferns Gallery, Los Angeles. 

24. ANNIE*. 1962. Oil on canvas, 71" x 66y2". 
Lent by the L. M. Asher Family, Los Angeles. 

25. UNTITLED. 1962. Oil on canvas, 72" x 67". 
Lent by Dr. Leopold Tuchman, Beverly Hills. 

26. TALK ABOUT SPACE. 1963. Oil on canvas, 72" x 67". 
Lent by Ferns Gallery, Los Angeles. 

27. UNTITLED. 1963. Oil on canvas, 72" x 67". 
Lent by Ferus Gallery, Los Angeles. 

28. COLD CEREAL. 1960-61. Oil on canvas, 24" x 30". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Allan Stone, New York. 

29. DELICATESSEN COUNTER. 1962. Oil on canvas, 60" x 72". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Stephen D. Paine, Boston. 

30. RIDE, RIDE, RIDE. 1962. Oil on canvas, 40" x 50". 
Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Alan Slifka, New York. 

31. YO-YOS. 1962. Oil on canvas, 12" x 12". 

Lent by Mr. and Mrs. Robert Kelly, Sacramento 

32. CAKE COUNTER. 1962-63. Oil on canvas, 60" x 72". 
Lent by the Abrams Faintly Collection, New York. 

33. CREAM SOUPS. 1963. Oil on canvas, 30" x 36". 
Lent by Allan Stone Gallery, New York. 

34. JAWBREAKER MACHINE*. 1963. Oil on canvas, 26" x 31%' 
Lent by Allan Stone Gallery, New York. 

Works marked by an asterisk are illustrated. 
In dimensions, height precedes width. 


I am indebted to Mrs. Eugenie Klix for her curatorial work on the exhibi- 
tion, and to Mrs. Leonard Asher for advice and hospitality ; and to Irving 
Blum and Rolf Nelson for their cooperation. L. A. 

Staff of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art 

Richard E Brown, Director 

James Elliott, Director of Fine Arts 

John Van MacNair, Director of Public Services 

Robert G. Tillotson, Director of Business Management 

William Osmun, Senior Curator 

Ebria Eeinblatt, Curator of Prints & Drawings 

Stefania R Holt, Curator of Costumes & Textiles 

Eugene I. Holt, Assistant Curator of Costumes & Textiles 

Henry T. Hopkins, Head of Museum Education 

George Kuwayama, Curator of Oriental Art 

Gregor Norman-Wilcox, Curator of Decorative Arts 

Frieda Kay Fall, Registrar 

Larry Curry, Research Assistant 

Eugenie Klix, Curatorial Assistant 

Catalog designed by Deborah Sussman 
pi'inted by Koltun Brothers, Los Angeles