Ryan Schroeder

In Kevin Beasley’s On the path to reconciliation, four identical copies of the book “Philip Guston Now” are encased in raw cotton and resin. Even though all four copies are identical, the process of encasement makes them a single object, one giant book. On the bookshelf, all of the other books are unaffected. All are different books on various artists, each one fulfilling the same role the Philip Guston book initially served. However, the book is now depersonalized and obscured. The book is no longer able to be read. Looking carefully from all directions, the books are still recognizably books. Close investigation even reveals the title clearly. But there is a clear effort to hide the book and its contents. The inner two books of the four are completely obscured, both by the other identical copies, as well as the cotton that covers the spine. The cotton plays an important role in actively covering the books. While resin restrains and contains, it is cotton which functions as the obscurer, hiding the word “Now” on every copy but on the spine of one copy, and “Philip Guston” in some way on all. 

In his work, Guston covered themes of racism and political satire, using abstract art to criticize groups like the Ku Klux Klan. In 2020, “Philip Guston Now”, a retrospective of the artist’s work, was planned to tour; it was prevented from doing so by all four of the institutions sponsoring the retrospective. The stated reason was a claim to social justice, especially with regards to Guston’s Klan paintings, 24 of which were in the collection. Despite Guston criticizing the Klan, the depiction of the Klan was seen as too much. Stopping the paintings from being shown is only preventing criticism of racism from existing. With the physical copies of the books of the same name, they too are being contained, the message too is being restricted. In this work, the resin and especially the cotton work together to perform the same function as those who canceled the Guston exhibition. However, inside of this concealment, the books are still visible. The titles can still be read, and images can still be seen. It seems that just like in the effort to conceal Guston, the restriction of the books has not been successful. Even though the books cannot be opened, their meaning can still be conveyed. While the body of Guston is restricted, it is still revealed and visible. This censorship is wrong, but it is not complete, and cannot be complete as long as a part is still visible.

As part of their in-depth engagement with A body, revealed, our Teen Curators had the opportunity to interview artists, curators, and gallerists about Kevin Beasley’s practice. Veronica Levitt is a director at Casey Kaplan Gallery. This interview excerpt has been edited for length and clarity.

Good Afternoon, my name is Shaina and these are my partners Vionnie and Ryan. We are working with the Hill Art Foundation this year as we display Kevin Beasley’s work. We are here today to talk with Veronica Levitt, a director of sales and artist relations at Casey Kaplan Gallery. This conversation with Ms. Veronica Levitt will help frame a better understanding of the finances and relationship needed with Kevin Beasley to keep his work in the gallery. 

Shaina: Going into the length that you work with artists and talking specifically about Kevin Beasley, a big part of  artist relations is maintaining a good connection with the artists that you’re working with. So can you describe as much as you’re comfortable with about your relationship with Kevin Beasley as an artist and how that helps influence how you put together his exhibit with regard to his intentions and what you wanted it to do for the gallery and the public?

Veronica: The relationship is everything. I like to think about it as a partnership. With any partnership, whether it’s in business or in friendship, there needs to be mutual respect, honesty, and transparency. In that, it’s incredibly vital to foster a good relationship or the whole thing crumbles. Kevin, in particular, is unique because I joined the gallery shortly after he joined. And we kind of grew up together. In a lot of ways [we’re evolving] together. And because I have worked with Kevin now for seven years, I have intimate knowledge of the work, as well as Kevin’s preferences, which allows me to proceed in kind. The gallery’s detailed understanding of the practice and evolution of his work, and the history of his acquisitional and institutional developments leads to more conversations and opportunities because we’re collaborating on an intrinsic level. 

Vionnie: To follow up with the relationship with the artist, some artists can have work that might be difficult in terms of physicality to move and to get into spaces to set up and curate. Also, as we spoke about, galleries are institutions that are meant to appeal to the public, and that you want to be approachable. So how do you feel like Casey Kaplan work to make sure the artist’s work can be represented in the best way possible and in the truest way that they intend it, whilst also compromising with the needs of the gallery? 

Veronica: There are often parameters, spatial and financial. However, there is always a solution as long as there is open communication about those boundaries. 

In situations where we say okay, we love that idea, but the feasibility of that isn’t possible, we work together on an alternative or variation. Conversations around budgets are necessary, whilst maintaining and serving the artist’s best interests.