STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42
STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42
STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42
STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42
115

STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42

Estimate: 20,000 - 30,000 USD

STANLEY CASSELMAN | IR-42

Estimate: 20,000 - 30,000 USD

Lot Sold:18,750USD

Lot Details

Description

STANLEY CASSELMAN

b.1963

IR-42


signed, titled, inscribed and dated 2013 on the reverse

acrylic on canvas

72 by 58 in. (182.9 by 147.3 cm.)


PROVENANCE

Private Collection, New York 

Condition Report

This work is in excellent condition overall. There are textural shifts due to the artist's working method and chosen media. Under ultraviolet light, there are no apparent repairs or inpainting. Unframed.


The lot is sold in the condition it is in at the time of sale. The condition report is provided to assist you with assessing the condition of the lot and is for guidance only. Any reference to condition in the condition report for the lot does not amount to a full description of condition. The images of the lot form part of the condition report for the lot provided by Sotheby's. Certain images of the lot provided online may not accurately reflect the actual condition of the lot. In particular, the online images may represent colours and shades which are different to the lot's actual colour and shades. The condition report for the lot may make reference to particular imperfections of the lot but you should note that the lot may have other faults not expressly referred to in the condition report for the lot or shown in the online images of the lot. The condition report may not refer to all faults, restoration, alteration or adaptation because Sotheby's is not a professional conservator or restorer but rather the condition report is a statement of opinion genuinely held by Sotheby's. For that reason, Sotheby's condition report is not an alternative to taking your own professional advice regarding the condition of the lot.

Cataloguing

Provenance

Private Collection, New York 

Catalogue Note

“Then came Stanley Casselman… He hadn’t copied one painting: These were originals in the manner of Richter. All had nifty squeegee sluices of blurry paint, but they were either too pretty or illusionistic or atmospheric… The examples of Stanley’s own art that I saw are nothing like Richter’s. They’re highly crafted abstract minimalist works. Not to my taste, but done impeccably. Which turns out to be key for copying: He is a practiced artist who knows how to handle paint.


All of the paintings seemed Richterian, but many had an Impressionistic, un-Richterian prettiness. Many looked too thought-out. Accidents looked intentional rather than discovered. His decisions stood out instead of taking me by surprise. Richter—who applies paint in scrims, in layers that emerge through one another—controls accident with a physical intelligence and subtle changes of direction and touch; his decisions are in an incredible call-and-response relationship to accidents. His abstract paintings look like photographs of abstract paintings. This creates glitches in your ­retinal-cerebral memory, so that you perceive this uncanny space between abstraction, accident, photography, process, the nature of paint, and painting. These didn’t.


Then, suddenly, one made my heart beat faster. Stanley grimaced. “That one’s not my best,” he said. “You’re wrong,” I told him. Then another struck me. He winced again… Then I understood that only when Stanley stopped thinking he was making a Richter could he make one”


(Jerry Saltz, “Saltz Challenges: Produce a Perfect Faux Gerhard Richter Painting, and I’ll Buy It”, Vulture, 25 November 2012)

Contemporary Art Online | New York
Online bidding closed18 Jul 2019 | 07:30 PM GMT