![\"\"](\"http:\/\/artistsofutah.org\/15Bytes\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/12\/02.jpg\")
<\/a>Alex-Katz,-Ann-Lauterbach,1977,aquatint,UMFA#1976.008,Art-\u00a9-Alex-Katz_Licensed-by-VAGA,-New-York,-NY<\/p><\/div>\n
The\u00a0Utah Museum of Fine Art<\/a>\u00a0puts its best face forward with a collection of prints, photographs and sculpture. Most of the work in the show falls under the umbrella of Pop, and overtly or otherwise deals with portraiture.<\/p>\n The artists within\u00a0Faces<\/em>\u00a0are well known, but the work shown is not necessarily what they are known for. Perhaps the most widely notable is Andy Warhol, whose Polaroid photographs \u2013 a recent gift of the Andy Warhol Foundation \u2013 are on view for the first time with this exhibit. Other big-hitters in the show include Alex Katz, Larry Rivers and Robert Arneson.<\/p>\n Alex Katz\u2019 name is synonymous with large, billboard-sized oil paintings. In this exhibit we get a look at several of his etchings and aquatints instead. They lack most of the presence of his flagship works, but retain his stylistic charm and his sensitivity to the subject. The same flat colors that are used throughout his larger paintings translate remarkably well to the prints \u201cBoy with Branch I\u201d and \u201cAnne Lauterbach.\u201d The 12 etchings of “Untitled,” arranged in a grid on the wall and lacking his quintessential color palette, are a more somber approach to portraiture, not only in their lack of color but in their tight cropping. All of the foreheads, and in some cases even the chins, fall off the edge of the paper creating a too-tight cropping that is reminiscent of amateur photography. The portraits, small as they are, give the impression of expanding beyond the edges of the paper. The viewer is presented with an intimate perspective of what one imagines must be the close friends and family of the artist.<\/p>\n Andy Warhol,Pia Zadora, Polaroid (Polacolor ER),UMFA#-2008.15.30,Gift of The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts,\u00a9The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts,Inc.<\/p><\/div>\n For arguably the biggest name in the show, Andy Warhol\u2019s works in\u00a0Faces<\/em>\u00a0are not what the general public will expect to see. Warhol\u2019s bombastic screen prints are a fixture of the collective consciousness, and visions of soup cans spring to mind at the mere mention of his name. Lesser known are his Polaroid portraits that served as both source material and works of art in their own right. Twenty of these Polaroid photos are on display, in five groups of four divided by the following criteria: two sets of women, two sets of men, and one set of people holding something \u2013 a baby, a dog, a lover. The groupings are probably for logistical reasons, but they intentionally or otherwise present each photo as part of a larger collection. While the groupings provide an interesting visual, they almost downplay the value of each Polaroid as an individual work \u2013 as if one photo on its own isn\u2019t enough. They end up relying on each other for presence and validity. Like a collection of trading cards, you end up with your favorites, but the collection is worth more than any single card.<\/p>\n Robert Arneson\u2019s work lends a sense of brevity to the show that is otherwise lacking. While his piece \u201cHead Bath\u201d mirrors the cropped foreheads of the Katz pieces, it takes it a step further, actually severing the top of the head above the eyebrows. While most viewers will not be familiar with Arneson, the piece is worth a closer look as a fairly representative example of his print career.<\/p>\n Andy Warhol, Polaroids, shown as part of the Faces exhibition at the UMFA,Gift of The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts,\u00a9The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts,Inc.<\/p><\/div>\n Larry Rivers has, if not the most interesting, the most complicated work of art in the exhibit. His screen print \u201cLiving at the Movies\u201d features several people sitting in a movie theater. It is the only piece of work in the show that goes beyond the portrait aspect of a single subject. The print flips the vantage point of a theater, and instead turns the lens on the audience. In this representation, the audience is a manifestation of intimacy \u2013 perhaps more. Couples lovingly lean on each other and hold hands, as is common in a darkened theater. One close up of a woman holding a bucket of popcorn between her legs, shows her hand entering the bucket \u2013 a suggestive metaphor for other activities carried out in darkened theaters. The title implies that these activities are really what \u201cliving\u201d at the movies is all about.<\/p>\n<\/a>