Page 166 - Trends

162

COMPOsITIOn WITH CUBe #1, 1990 WATerCOLOr 22x30 In. /55,5x76 CM. 
MOTHer And CHILd, 1990 WATerCOLOr 30x22 In. /76x55 CM. 
ABsTrACT COMPOsITIOn, 1982 WATerCOLOr 22x30 In. /55,5x76 CM. 
ABsTrACT COMPOsITIOn, 1983 WATerCOLOr 30x22 In. /76x55 CM. 

there’s something else to be seen. Should we avoid the telescope to avoid
incursion? Better not see overmuch less the paintings get overworked.”
That period of 15 years contains the blossoming, and coming to fruition of
a lifetime of preparation. It would heed many subdivisions. The abstract
landscapes – as I write this, my eye encompasses a number of those. It
is as if he would re-create in his studio the multiplicity of aspects of the
hilly terrain. I see the shadows of clouds as they move over the sky. He
will of course add to his new versions of nature the freedom of spirit of his
“colorist” psyche.
Reflections may be of buildings, bridges, lines of trees or setting suns.
The tree is often present. In fact, there were trees in some of the late
70’s watercolours, some amazing forests. Now the tree is often a strong
individual, dwarfed by an intensely red sky, or majestically standing in
front of it.
I am comforted by the awareness of the natural flowing of the images that
surround me, a Colorado within the Grand Canyon, a Rhone running to the
Mediterranean, a Seine sensually meandering thru the love of her Paris,
before basking in the “Douce France de mon enfance”.
I would like to insert a reality check. When someone asks me: “Did he make
his living with his art?” I answer: “not always by a long shot”, but Art was
always Numero Uno (No 1.) Indeed there was not a day – no matter what
else he did – where he did not breathe art, live art, talk art and create art.
The other question is “How long did it take him to do a painting?” I look at
the date - say a painting created in 1985... and my answer is 38 years and
3 afternoons. For I can vouch that there was not a day where he was not
a committed artist.
Newman’s Works on Paper
It might be as good a time as ever for me to point out the importance David
attached to drawing. Ever since our early Paris nights, where I had the
chance to pore over the drawings he was bringing back from his daily visits
to the museums. The stories were interesting: how the Musée Rodin did
not let you even have a no.2 pencil, while at the Louvre they would let him
hold in his hands the most precious Renaissance works on paper. He was
horrified at the prospect of someone sneezing, and sad at having to find
devices to jot down some innocuous sketches when there was no threat
to the art...I particularly remember a book of Durer from which he made
copies, no doubt to practice the art of pen and ink shading, a technique he
will never abandon over the years, even at moments when he was involved
with bold improvisations.
His works on paper, at that time mainly a vehicle for study of the masters, the
creation of his own resource center, became the think tank out of which for
the longest time all works will be issued, perhaps with the exception of most
of his portraits. I must mention here that David was primarily self-taught.
He designed his own program of study and never used short-cuts, driven by