Polder: a Festscrift for John Clute and Judith Clute, edited by Farah Mendlesohn, Old Earth Books, 2006. ……………….Contributors: Tom Disch, Damien Broderick, Rob Latham, Sean McMullen, Candas Jane Dorsey, Joe Haldeman, Geoff Ryman, Scott Bradfield, Paul Kincaid, Brian Aldiss, William Gibson, Bruce Sterling, Ian Watson, Neil Gaiman, Javier A Martinez, Andrew M Butler, Jack Womack, Gary K Wolfe, M John Harrison, Edward James, Kim Stanley Robinson, Ellen Datlow, Elizabeth Hand, Graham Sleight, Roz Kaveney, Pamela Zoline.
Suzanne Perkins won a place for Judith Clute here on page 146 of the Association of Illustrators, 1985. She was the commissioning editor at The Women’s Press.
Dick Jude analyses Judith Clute’s work in Fantasy Art Masters 2002, pages 38 to 49.
Paul Barnett analyses Judith Clute’s work in an article, “Surrealism Reversed”, in Paper Tiger Fantasy Art Gallery 2002, pages 30 to 35.
The text of Pamela Zoline’s note written for Judith Clute’s Parkway Focus solo show in 1976.
Clute’s paintings are full of enjoyment of the fact of vision, the delectation of the facts of the visual world, but not simply. They are full of meaning, yet resist linear interpretation; like all good paintings they are not reducible into their “stories”; they remain intact in the face of theory or analysis.
While they have sometimes been mistaken for cousins to the New Realists, a closer look shows up the mistake; these paintings are full of different voices, different grammatical levels of visual language speaking within the same work. Note in the “Great Chain of Being Show” the weeping face and the clown make-up quoting each other, the diagrammatic comic of the bottom, the “fast’ car, and the wonderful “primitive” heralds at the top, with the gorgeous dragon who is as though fashioned out of an exquisite jalebi (orange Indian sweet); it is a multilingual work, a veritable George Steiner of a painting. And again, watch in “Safe!”as the cams click on teeth across the surface of the painting, a shameless device, body-Englishing the composition, flaunting its wit.
Another way you can tell that this isn’t new realism (Bite the coin, Zeb, see if it’s real gold) is by looking for where the action is; more clearly, the delights are not the naive and blissful trompe l’oeil look-ma-it’s-like-a-snapshot-of-a-real-rose-gee-smell-it; the delights are in the calling up of appearances and versions of vision, translation, quotation, the camera’s view (almost) and Ingres’s view, and look it wasn’t really the camera’s eye at all because look at the painterly solution of the problems. And there’s one of the keys, for painterly designates that epiphany which gives the business of painting its grip in the re-establishment, with each new vision, of a notation adequate for the translation of three dimensions into two. This re-establishment of notation is epiphanous. When it doesn’t happen the painting is wallpaper. It happens here.
Clute’s paintings are full of women. As we would expect from this very sophisticated painter there is no haranguing, and not a trace of manifesto, but one wonders if the work of making women visible to themselves, giving them a whole face, is not part of the work that is going on here, quietly and in one of those professions in which, as they keep telling us, there hasn’t been a first-rate practitioner; not yet.
One useful heuristic for looking at paintings is the divisions of All Paintings into two categories, those that nourish and conjure, and those that do not flinch. Rembrandt, Rubens, DeKooning, Watteau, Rauschenberg, Picasso belong in the first category; Piero, Vermeer, Juan Gris, Van Eyck, Mondrian, Velasquez, Ingres in the second; it’s like a division between warm and cool, but not quite as simple, and it is as procrustean as all but the best heuristics, because where does Matisse fit and where is Cezanne? Still it sheds an ounce or two of light, and one thing about this painter is clear, Clute’s paintings do not flinch.
So, we have paintings with a surface which is tactful but refuses to be charming; and a form which becomes increasingly more eloquent, able to take on more layers, as the painter progresses. The earlier paintings in this group, “Child’s play”, “Engaging”, “American Alice”, are now visible, with the hindsight provided by the more recent works, as exercises in the mastery of themes, of themes made as and through visual elements. It is exciting to see the taking on of powers as the painter becomes increasingly adept, as though with a playwright we could say: here we see her taking on the ironic voice, here the droll, the witty, the tragic, the romantic, the primitive, the voice of fashion, the creak of tumbrils in Arcadia; and they are all taken on through the visual, conversing within each painting, and they are legitimate cohabiters. If we as observers wonder about point of view, well, what with the new novel and the suspect narrator, banana skins of modernism, that’s the fun of the 20th century, n’est pas? As they say in Paris, France.
Parkway Focus …. Exhibition: 24 September – 15 October, 1976
Triad Regional Arts Centre … Exhibition: 6 – 25 May, 1974