Ian Tyson - page 3
Tyson’s work bears strong affinities with geometric abstraction, minimalism, and constructivism, yet he defied the standard precepts of such movements. He sought not to eliminate the hand or organizing rationale of the artist, as others did. While the grid established his basic parameters, Tyson’s explorations were intuitive. Tyson himself had little interest in labels, rejecting identification with specific movements and seeing distinctions between terms like “artists’ books” and “livres d’artistes” as meaningless. During our interview on November 16, 2020, I inquired about his reaction to a description of his work I found, which reads, “His books are ‘geometric constructivism with a hint of romantic minimalism.’”[1] Confirming that the unattributed quote was not from him, Tyson responded by saying, “I think it sounds like a sales pitch for a very nice chocolate.”[2]
Tyson’s work is all the more profound for the subtlety which informed both the formal qualities of his art and the way he discussed his practice. Although generous in expressing his admiration of others’ artwork, he often seemed reluctant to discuss specific influences. He eschewed the pontifications and manifestoes often associated with artists of his generation. When asked about his practice, he casually waved away references to movements, preferring to detail the practical and technical elements of his work. He responded to similarly to questions regarding how he hoped his work would be received. An anecdote he shared with me during one of our many conversations over the past year nicely summarizes his perspective:
“I had an exhibition a few years ago in a gallery near here … a woman came up to me and she said, ‘I don’t know anything about art, and I don’t know anything about your work, and I don’t want to – but it gives me an immense feeling of peace.’ And I thought, that’s what it’s about. If you reach that, what else can anyone say to you?”[3]
Creating works informed by personal experiences and associations, Tyson nevertheless expressed greater interest in the idiosyncratic emotional responses of viewers than in the communication of a specific message.
I count myself among individuals influenced by both Ian himself and his work, and I do not think it is hyperbole to say that he exerted a profound impact on me personally. I first met Ian in 2004 when he attended the opening of a retrospective exhibition of his work I was fortunate enough to curate at the University of California, San Diego, which holds the Tetrad Press archives. This experience altered my experience of and appreciation for minimalist and abstract art. Fifteen years later, this influence affected my decision to enter SMU’s PhD program in Art History and last fall I was able to write a paper on Tyson for a seminar. Ian was gracious enough to grant my request to interview him over Zoom, and we met weekly for two hours throughout November 2020. After the semester we decided to continue our conversations as regularly as possible. We were able to record twenty conversations over the past year, up until his passing. Eventually, edited versions of these recordings will be made available through Bridwell Library to supplement research of the library’s extensive collection of his works.
[1] Sarah Bodman. Artists’ Books Creative Production and Marketing. Bristol: Impact Press, 2010, p. 83.
[2] Ian Tyson, interview with R. Arvid Nelsen, Monday, November 16, 2020, 1:08:01.
[3] Ian Tyson, interview with R. Arvid Nelsen, Monday, November 2, 2020, 1:44:50-1:45:42.
