Yikes! “Exhibiting Paintings” exhibits typos
I love John Baldessari’s art. What writer wouldn’t? Baldessari (or, more specifically, a sign painter directed by Baldessari) puts unadorned words on canvas and, voilà, they become art.
But I’m troubled: Baldessari’s “Exhibiting Paintings,” which I admired in Hirshhorn earlier this year, exhibits a typo, a comma error, and a hyphenation error. All of them painted in acrylic on canvas and displayed for thousands of art lovers to see. Yikes. Am I the only one who’s noticed?
Here’s the text:
Almost every painter arrives at the stage when he would like to exhibit his work. It is a good idea to have your painting shown with those of others; it gives you a fresh perspective, because it is surprising how different your pictures look on the wall surrounded by paintings of other artists. Sometimes you are agreeably surprised when your painting holds it’s own in comparison. At other times the painting that seemed so colorful and strong in your studio looks drab and weak alongside other pictures.
I’m certain you spotted the typo. It’s the “it’s.” Baldessari — or, perhaps more charitably, his sign painter — has confused the contraction “it’s” with the possessive “its” in the third sentence. Uncorrected, his sentence reads as follows: “Sometimes you are agreeably surprised when your painting holds it is own in comparison.”
As typos go, I’d have to label this offense a felony, rather than a misdemeanor. It’s so permanent and bold and, well, on display, unlike, say, a typo on a website which can be corrected within seconds.
You’d think during the year it took to create the piece (1967-68), someone might have consulted Strunk and White. Unfortunately, the Apostrophe Protection Society wasn’t founded until 2001. And Eats, Shoots & Leaves:The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation wasn’t published until 2003.
Then again, anyone have any beige paint? Heck, get the Hirshhorn curator to call the restoration department and have them cover up the offending apostrophe. Or call in another sign painter. Making the change won’t affect the inter-letter spacing. In fact, upon close inspection, it looks as though Baldessari (oops, I mean his sign painter) may have added the apostrophe after he painted the work of art. Can’t you see him hesitating, brush in hand?
I think removing the offending apostrophe could actually be an interesting art event. Imagine all the art-loving grammarians in attendance! Lynne Truss could be a celebrity guest. And Baldessari could oversee the sign painter’s correction, creating art, once again.
Let’s return to the comma error and the incorrect hy-phena-tion. The comma error occurs before “because” in the second sentence. Unfortunately, removing the extraneous comma will create too much space in the middle of the painting.
Stet.
What about the incorrect hypenation in “perspect-ive.” Correcting that would ruin the left-justified margin. Can’t you just see the “t” hanging out there all by itself?
Why would Baldessari (or, once again, that invisible sign painter) need to paint a hypen anyway? If he (I’m having trouble with pronoun reference here) had simply moved “perspective” down to the next line (picture this text as a Word doc), then the next hyphenated word — “surround-ing” — could also appear unhyphenated.
With due respect to Baldessari, here’s my rewrite:
Every painter wants to exhibit work. But exhibiting your work can be humbling. Sometimes your work looks good; sometimes it looks drab. You can create art about that.
Sign painters, have at it.
—That’s words on words






August 29th, 2007 at 10:02 am
Accidental or not I think the typos and the typographical errors make the piece better. It’s important to note that Baldessari did not paint this nor did he write it. The text came from an art book whose title is lost to time. It is possible that the typos were present in the original text and were copied by the sign painter, but this is not likely.
As with all art, and especially contemporary art, it is important to take into consideration the intent of the artist. Here, one of Baldessari’s intentions is to remove himself from the creation of the piece. Which he has done. It is this process of removal and creation that led to the errors, and the two are inextricably linked as cause and effect.
Another of Baledssari’s intentions is the display of irony (I’m using the term loosely here). Can the piece be both a work of art and a commentary on art itself? The arrogance and matter-of-factness of the statement seems to tell a different story than what Baldessari is using it for. In this case it’s as if the typos are meant as little jabs against the statement, an attempt to deflate it’s authority.
Accidental or not the errors must stay.
August 29th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Nick, You’re right. It is important to point out that Baldessari did not paint this, and I’m assuming he didn’t write it either. In the MoMA audio archives, Baldessari discusses “What is Painting,” another words-on-canvas piece, and notes, “the text is painted by a professional sign painter, and the text is not written by me, but is appropriated text.”
“I would put it on canvas and that would be a signal that it would be art. The piece is not actually, physically done by me,” he says.
By the way, if anyone is New York anytime before September 17, 2007, you can view Baldessari’s work “What is Painting” in a MoMA exhibit of the same name.
July 25th, 2008 at 9:07 am
[…] From Larsen Idealog: Yikes! “Exhibiting Paintings” Exhibits Typos […]