On November 9, 1965, a crew from Bekins Moving Company arrived at 2322 Fillmore Street, San Francisco. In an apartment on the second floor, they cautiously unmounted an enormous painting — eight feet by eleven and weighing literally a ton — lowered it to the floor and packed it into a wooden crate. A carpenter cut out a window and part of the façade; the movers gently slid the painting out this slot onto the platform of a crane, then lowered it to the sidewalk and into the truck. The artist hovered, nervously smoking, clowning for a friend’s camera as her life’s work, unmanageable and well-nigh uncontainable, was shipped away.
Jay DeFeo was born in 1929, in Hanover, New Hampshire. She grew up in the Bay Area, and studied art at Berkeley, earning her MFA in 1951. After a year in Europe, she returned to Berkeley; in 1954, she married the painter Wally Hedrick, and they moved to San Francisco. Hedrick and others founded the Six Gallery, remembered today for the first reading of “Howl”. He and DeFeo established themselves on Fillmore Street, and for the next ten years, a rotating cast of San Francisco’s painting and writing bohemia rented other apartments in the building.
Through the 1950s, DeFeo painted productively, making a name for herself in the second wave of Abstract Expressionism. She had paintings in a group show in Los Angeles in 1959; then, she and Hedrick were invited to participate in “Sixteen Americans”, an exhibition at the Whitney Museum of Modern Art in New York, alongside the likes of Johns, Rauschenberg and Stella. The curator, Dorothy Miller, wanted to include Deathrose, a large new painting, but DeFeo said it wasn’t ready. She and Hedrick didn’t attend — with true bohemian insouciance, they gave away the airplane tickets MOMA sent them — and in any case, by the time of the opening, DeFeo was already deep in work, extending her new painting beyond anything she’d done before.
She worked at it all day, every day, for the next five years. The basic design was set early on — an abstract sunburst or cloudburst radiating from a point a bit above eye level — but the surface kept changing, and growing. Photographs of its various stages show many different textures. Sometimes she carved into the growing surface, but mostly she built, layer on layer of paint, even before the last layer had properly dried. At one point, the paint spread outward off the canvas and onto the wall around it: she jerry-rigged a new frame around it to accommodate the new scale, and kept working.
She might never have finished The Rose (as it came to be called) without the intervention of fate. In March 1965, Walter Hopps of the Pasadena Art Museum (now the Norton Simon) asked to show it. And then in September, the landlord at Fillmore Street served an eviction notice. Quickly, she accepted Hopps’ offer. The day after the painting was moved, DeFeo and Hedrick vacated the building, and separated. DeFeo followed the painting to Pasadena, and worked at it a few months longer before breaking off for good.
She returned to the Bay Area, but to Marin County, rather than San Francisco; she dropped out of the art scene, and didn’t pick up a brush for the next three years. She resumed painting in 1970, and continued painting, photography, and teaching (at Mills College) until her death in 1989, of cancer. (It’s hard not to suspect that the years of work on The Rose, living on paint fumes and Christian Brothers brandy, contributed.)
The painting itself returned to San Francisco in 1969. It was exhibited at the San Francisco Art Institute, but soon began to sag badly. To slow the damage, the Art Institute wrapped it up and plastered it into the wall, until the resources could be found to restore it properly. Finally, after DeFeo’s death, the Whitney Museum took on the project. The painting was excavated and carefully restored, with a new steel frame inside the layers and layers of paint. It first appeared in its new form at the Whitney on November 9, 1995, thirty years to the day after it was untimely ripped from its birthplace on Fillmore.
I saw it a year later, on loan at the Berkeley Art Museum. For such a massive, extravagant effort, it’s surprisingly reticent at first — the sunburst is muted, white on mostly gray. In the crevasses of the surface, though, other colors peek through, hinting at what’s buried beneath. The effect is at once overwhelming and shy.
Today it’s out of sight again, packed away in a metal cage in the Whitney’s storage facility. When I inquired this summer, they told me there’s no way to see it. These days in the City, we’re hearing a lot about the proposal of Donald Fisher, founder of The Gap, to build a museum in the Presidio for his collection of modern and contemporary art. I would suggest to Fisher, once he gets the site he wants, that he make room in the building for The Rose — the greatest artwork ever made in San Francisco, and in need of a good home.
In the meantime, for a taste of the painting, you can’t do better than Bruce Conner’s beautiful short film of the removal, The White Rose (with Miles Davis’ Sketches of Spain for a score). I also recommend Jane Green and Leah Levy, Jay DeFeo and The Rose (2003) — great photos and useful writing.
[Updated to correct a serious misstatement at the end: the painting is inaccessible, not decaying again.]
25 comments
November 9, 2008 at 12:59 pm
grackle
Very nice post, Vance. Envious again at the clarity and economy of your writing, and I loved the Bruce Conner film. I’ll have to hold, “the greatest artwork ever made in San Francisco…” as an example of enthusiastic reportage, but at the moment I can’t refute it either. Thanks.
November 9, 2008 at 2:14 pm
urbino
Really interesting post, Vance.
November 9, 2008 at 2:59 pm
shadowcook
Love it. Where does DeFeo stand in the estimation of the local art museums? I hope to god Fisher makes good on his plan. I do my feeble bit by belonging to and visiting both SF MOMA and the De Young/Legion of Honor, but modern and contemporary art museums are the only features of life in LA that I envy.
November 9, 2008 at 3:54 pm
NCProsecutor
I hope that this enigmatic and storied work will someday enjoy a wider audience.
November 9, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Vance
There’s some of her work in the collections at SFMOMA, the Berkeley Art Museum, and the De Young. (None on display at the moment, I think.) There’s a list of collections at the website of her estate. (For example, the Art Institute of Chicago.)
And yes, I hope the Donald Fisher museum works out. The historical value of the buildings in the Presidio is real enough but easily exaggerated — I hope the Trust is willing to indulge his whims as necessary to get the thing built.
November 9, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Vance
And yes, “the greatest artwork…” sounds like hyperbole, yet I quite seriously don’t know of another to set beside it. “Howl”, for instance, was written in Berkeley.
(To my embarrassment, I have not seen Greed. Ben A. will probably assure us it blows DeFeo out of the water.)
November 9, 2008 at 7:30 pm
JPool
Nice post indeed. Thanks particularly for the link to the film. I love the scene where DeFeo lays down and rolls across the covered canvas.
November 9, 2008 at 7:53 pm
matt w
The Maltese Falcon (the book, not the movie)? Stand! by Sly and the Family Stone, which Wikipedia tells me was recorded partly at Pacific Heights Studio at 60 Brady Street? Thelonious Alone in San Francisco? These cross-genre comparisons are hard.
And of course there’s that ad with the Superballs.
November 9, 2008 at 7:56 pm
urbino
The Last Waltz?
November 9, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Vance
The Maltese Falcon (the novel)?
November 9, 2008 at 8:07 pm
ben
I think the greatest artwork this city has ever beheld is the patchwork narrative that comes together by chance and accident [and whatever Hellenistic concept is failing me now] every day in the lives of its teeming inhabitants. Truly is beauty not a separable part of life, much less a temporary haven from life, but life itself, and realized in no other medium!
November 9, 2008 at 8:09 pm
ben
Even “narrative” in that comment betrays too much of idealizing piety. I am chastened.
November 9, 2008 at 8:15 pm
ben
The word I wanted was clinamen.
I will now cease disturbing the discussion.
November 9, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Ahistoricality
One of the most wonderful things about the 20th century is that it became possible for obsession, intensity, creativity and temporary insanity to be expressed outside of the realm of religion.
November 9, 2008 at 9:02 pm
foeb
Oh come now. What is more wonderful than a good old-fashioned demonic possession?
November 9, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Vance
Whoops, I see Matt pwned me, not for the first time.
Via this post from 2004 on a DeFeo show at the Whitney, I see UC Press has put some of the photographs from the Rose book online — click through from here.
November 9, 2008 at 11:10 pm
herbert browne
As a one-time city skulk in the mid-60s (SF is the Best city to walk in!) I remember this particular “move”… unfortunately, 2nd-hand. That was a time of ferment- with the Charlatans throwing what I remember as the first “psychedelic dance shows” at a hall in the Marina that same Fall.
I was always sneaking into the Presidio to poke around, in those days… when one walked behind Sutro’s and along the beach cliffs to get there.
In 1999 I was back (after 33 years) to an ecology conference at the Presidio- now a National Park(?)- and saw a really lovely fresco on a wall in an historic chapel there. (It wasn’t in the main chapel, but in a room parallel to it… the building reminded me of an “aisle & bay” type barn… and my architectural vocab is obviously nearly non-existent.)
I’d agree with Ben that “everyday people” (& their everyday clinamen) are a constant work in progress by a passel of genii- all prodded, perhaps, by the knowledge of potentially cataclysmic temblors directly underfoot. Is it art? hmmm… ^..^
November 9, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Vance
Yes, the Presidio is now a national park, under a strange for-profit arrangement.
I’ll have to go check out the fresco. Was it this?
I’m not sure what Ben was after with his effusion on life itself. I suppose any city of the same size has about the same amount of that as San Francisco.
November 9, 2008 at 11:53 pm
ben
Yeah, but only San Francisco’s is in San Francisco.
November 9, 2008 at 11:58 pm
andrew
Clearly what we need is a universal standard unit of beauty. Then we can resolve this debate through quantification.
November 10, 2008 at 12:01 am
Vance
OK, so if we grant that real life in its blooming, buzzing, etc. is art, then obviously it’s richer and better art than the stuff we make, and thus the ensemble of us ordinary San Franciscans (in our peculiar age distribution) is the ongoing masterpiece. Big if.
November 10, 2008 at 1:40 am
julie
The piece is a refreshing commentary about Jay DeFeo. I had heard stories from Edmund Shea, who had collaborated with Bruce Conner on his Blue Angel pieces, but was never given his due credit to the work he produced till much later. Waitressing at La Mediteranee on Fillmore Street, there were several people who still came to hang out and share their memories of a time on Fillmore in the 60’s that was ripe. The re-telling of Jays work is important, not only because the work is so important, but it holds for us a place in time.
November 10, 2008 at 9:56 am
Vance
Thanks for the comment, Julie. (With my special editor powers, I can even tell which Julie you are!) I’d love to hear more stories sometime.
November 15, 2008 at 12:44 pm
yesIsaidyesiwillyes
Nice post, yes. Very nice.
However, the movie that is seen at the other end of the link you provide (which you state is to Bruce Conner’s film) ain’t in fact he Bruce Conner film, at least not to the film as he made it.
More directly: what’s seen is an unauthorized post of the film, unauthorized meaning done without permission of the copyright holder. Also, it’s a pixellated stinky mess of a copy. And it ain’t projected.
Bruce Conner repeatedly stated he did not want his films shown on-line. His widow, Jean Conner, has made exactly the same decision.
November 25, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Vance
Thanks, yes — sorry I missed your comment when you made it. Point taken about the bad copy of Conner’s film. (It’s not vastly worse, though, than the VHS copy I rented in the early ’90s.) Consider this link a sample, to whet people’s appetite for the real thing.