REVIEW: R.C. Kenedy
Richard Bixby’s work has been familiar to me for over a decade. During this period we have remained in close contact and every phase of his superficially at any rate very varied-seeming career is well known to me. I was first attracted by his art- nouveauish line drawings. These presented females in the nude translated into the printed circuit patterns of contemporary electronics as though the body’s machinery and its vitality drew the animal’s energies from processes which could be reproduced by technology – and it is characteristic that Bixby is interested in robot - making as well.
There was, thus, a strange counterpoint effect between form and content in these early compositions. The silhouettes harked back to an outmoded style and the thematic message was highly forward looking; but this was not self-evident on first acquaintance. Suddenly confronted by these designs and unprepared for their strange ambiguities, only their immaculate beauty impressed the viewer and technical proficiency of a high degree served only to stress Bixby’s preoccupation with personally defined icons of ideal perfection. Bixby’s images illustrated strained, allusive poses and it is no use denying the fact that the feminine body’s extreme tension conveyed notions of perverse and/or mysterious tendencies. The very precision of the detailing and the execution seemed to specify a cruelty and it was difficult to decide whether this harsh, impersonal, almost sadistic note described Bixby’s own attitudes or if the critic was meant to ascribe this absolutely heartless, uncaring and violent indifference to a universe in which the artist might have lost faith.
Not that these are questions to be resolved in this commentary on Bixby’s work.
It is one of the outstanding virtues of his oeuvre that these exclusive and seemingly antagonistic questions are repeatedly raised by every new phase in his progress and it is also his considerable achievement that these unanswerable puzzles, which overshadow all his activities, are increasingly more difficult to define and less easily translated into words. There is an unease which emanates from all his best pieces; he neither simplifies, nor overstates – but tries to establish coordinates within which his own vision is stated.
Bixby’s development as one of the important artists of the late twentieth century – and this, always nature oriented stance relates his interests to the scientifically motivated disposition of a great many artists of the Italian Renaissance.
Nor is it an accident that electronics occupy the place allotted to anatomy in his first experiments with the line. In Bixby’s imagery scientific inquisitiveness concentrates on the phenomena of life to interpret visions. In contradistinction to Renaissance artists, he uses foreknown data to understand the seen; he does not turn to the eye’s evidence to discover new knowledge – but his pictures are, nevertheless, a true combination of deductively and inductively obtained evidence and the resultant harmony of these two incompatible disciplines relates his oeuvre unquestionably to the spirit of the greatest age in European painting. It is natural enough that this questing bent has helped him to extend the horizon of his research. Nudes were much too restricted a subject to satisfy an artist of Bixby’s universally inclined curiosity. Life and all the phenomena of life suggest sources of picture making to him.
This hunger for natural raw materials found its natural outlet in fetishistic diagrams when he was a young man, guided, primarily at any rate, by his erotic conscience; but on maturing, this yearning for tangible and verifiable incentives has in fact become animistic in the widest sense of his pretty indeterminate world. His attendance upon features of a primeval and uncorrupted planet is almost mystical – and for the sake of greater accuracy, he has begun to use the photographic camera as well as one of his recording instruments. His fieldwork with mechanical reproductions is painterly in the purest terms. Only patterns and visions are commemorated through his lens. Rhythms, structures and metaphorically potent events are the result of his expeditions into the virgin forests of the North and he has succeeded in composing visual symphonies by bringing together or arranging sequences of these images. Abstract counter pointed narratives emerge from transparencies when he projects carefully contrasted yet coherent statements with collections of slides, each of which dwells either on significant detail or on composed wholes. In the details he highlights botanic or optic episodes, most of which display peculiar, lyrically charged symmetries – and such is the vital force of these symmetries that most of them have the power to act as metaphors. They represent flower and not-flower; daylight, tears and precious stones at the same time; or pistil and womanhood.
One could, no doubt, continue to list these visual double-entendres ad infinitum but mere catalogues of them would miss their point. Bixby exploits these ambiguities to locate the formal independence of every visually observable occurrence and fact. Having pinpointed fortuitous-seeming structural coincidences, he reintroduces both halves of his meaning in planned and pictorially transformed photographs of dramatically as well as sculpturally designed scenes – and in these the primal apparatus of his own temperament plays an important role.
Ropes are, of course, not the least impressive of these visually employed tools but he weaves their webbed twists and their knots around trees and around rocks, over canyons and waterfalls with an artist’s regard for pure, elemental declarations and he unwinds their story with faithful truth to the pictorial suggestiveness of his theme.
Found objects of the eye meet, thus, with their exegetic moment of truth in these always binarily conceived statements and his paring tendency gives a quasi-schizophrenic intensity to Bixby’s visually recited epics about boreal beauty of his forests. But his exemplary concern for optic insights has another and equally memorable result as well. Component features are also the raw materials in a great many of his overall designs, especially in his prints; and the repetitively chanted chromatic clusterings are also, without exception, derived from observed realities.
This fidelity to optic realities inspires the latest phase of his art. Light is the autochonous source of visual experiences and therefore, Bixby seems to have been led almost inevitably towards a direct confrontation with the problem of radiance. He approaches this almost final enigma with the same seriousness which acts as a hallmark of quality in his earlier work. He regards the miraculous moment of a scattered fleck of luminosity in a raindrop or on the crest of a wave as an occasion which can either be prepared or awaited in the right setting; and, in this sense, the record of it resembles the testimonial veracity of the imagery in which he records the found objects of nature or the found happenings of flora and fauna.
Discovery is always a find and in his photographs of diffraction he uncovers visual metaphors which, once again, bring out the allusive intermarriage of life with the inanimate object or event. The patterns of incandescence which he captures exploit scientific knowledge and scientific methods to describe bionomic forms in addition to their original, self-signalling halo – and it is very much to the point that he presents his case in this nimbus shaped aspect because the golden circle conveys a reverence for beauty similar to the religious devotion’s cryptography;
which invested the saints with aureole over their heads (although in Bixby’s case this reverence is often a good deal more ambiguous than in the illuminated miniatures of a mediaeval manuscript). Needless to say, however,
this equivocal note is probably Bixby’s most characteristically personal contribution to his own work. It is his style – which must not be confused with its content.
The content is always beauty; but he uses style and stylishness to locate his feeling of astonishment, of wonder and of the admirable in a familiar set of hieroglyphic and symbolical signs – all of which allude directly to the human being’s source-material of experiencing ravishment; and, in this context, the word ravishment is used both literally and allegorically; as, indeed, it appears with a Janus-like bicephalousness or twainness in Bixby’s work as well.
R.C. Kenedy London, 1977 Director of the Victorian & Albert Museum.