Cantate Domino

Title Cantate Domino (O Sing unto the Lord) Artist Barbara Hepworth (1903-1975) Date 1958 Medium Bronze Dimensions 2095 x 530 x 505 mm Accession # t00956 (Tate) Credit Presented by the artist, 1967. Cast 6/6 The title, Cantate Domino ('O Sing unto the Lord'), indicates the overtly religious nature of thissculpture. This fits with a wider pattern in Barbara Hepworth's work in the 1950s, associated with both personal and public issues, and was made manifest in the rising form of the sculpture.Cantate Domino is based on two diamond shapes formed in depth by flat planes so that they are open front and back. The structure of the lower diamond is more bulky and compressed, while the top of the upper diamond opens out at the points. The composition almost exactly matches the slightly shorter Ascending Form (Gloria), 1958 (BH 239, artist's estate, repr. Hodin 1961, pl.239), which has an additional back plate (pierced by a circle) sealing the upper form.  The sculpture was made for casting following Hepworth's established method of constructing an armature in expanded aluminium. This allowed for the production of the flat independent planes to which the plaster was applied. Brian Wall, who was an assistant of Hepworth's at the time, recalled that the outline was established first, then the inner strip passing between the diamonds, and finally the deep U-shape between the upper arms (interview with the author, 3 May 1996). A cast was made at the Art Bronze Foundry in Fulham and exhibited in 1958; further casting was underway in March 1959 (invoice, 10 March 1959, TGA 965). The inner strip was joined to the left hand side in the process of casting; according to Wall, Hepworth was unhappy about the closure of this gap (interview, 3 May 1996). The weight of the upper section caused structural problems. A welded joint at the waist of one copy (1/6) was found to be broken on arrival for Hepworth's first New York exhibition in late 1959 (letter Hepworth to Peter Gimpel, 24 Sept. 1959, TGA 965); this seems to have been the same cast which required repair at the foundry on its return from the British Artist Craftsmen exhibition which toured America (letter from Hepworth's secretary, Margaret Moir, to Peter Gimpel, 27 April 1961, TGA 965). Brian Wall also recalled repairing a cast (interview, 3 May 1996). The artist's copy, which came to the Tate, spent eight years in the studio garden (1959-67). It has a chalky surface over brown, possibly a result of the oxidisation of the bronze or of Hepworth's reputed use of sour milk in order to achieve a white patination (Tate Gallery Conservation Report).  Several commentators have remarked on the thrust of the composition. Michael Shepherd wrote that:  the resilience of the metal, and the organic spring which recalls the uncurling tendrils from a seed, unite with the upwards stretch like that of upstretched open hands. Thus a multiplicity of references from figurative associations, together with the work's own essential and abstractnature, come together to form an independent spiritual unity. (Shepherd 1963, [p.39])    This figurative interpretation was also taken up by Mullins. He calls it 'even more exultant' thanAscending Form, (Gloria), adding that they 'represent a free stylisation of the human hand raised in supplication and praise' ('Barbara Hepworth', Barbara Hepworth Exhibition 1970, exh. cat., Hakone Open-Air Museum, Japan 1970, unpag.). In this way the reflected forms may evoke hands in prayer, such as those in Albrecht Dürer's famous Study of Hands, 1508 (Albertina, Vienna, repr. Walter L. Strauss, The Complete Drawings of Albrecht Dürer, vol.2: 1500-1509, New York 1972, p.1033).  Although Hepworth herself did not specify such a literal interpretation, Mullins's assessment - culled from conversations with her - does reflect her general view of the spirituality of her work and sculpture in general. Writing to Herbert Read of the sculptures in the British Museum, she asserted: 'Only a society in a state of affirmation can produce sculpture - a primitive society or one fighting for its existence ... on the basis of active belief in both the virility of nature & the spiritual ascendancy of man' (18 Jan. 1953, Sir Herbert Read Archive, University of Victoria, B.C.). The latter she equated with 'a religious sensibility', adding: 'In an art [sculpture] which is intrinsically bound up with the understanding of natural forces, & an art which depends on virility of life & movement even for its comprehension, you have to look for a dynamic inter-play in society itself' (ibid.). Such an understanding of sculpture, as resulting from the conjunction of social and spiritual energies in a period of crisis while drawing on the latent forces of nature, was central to Hepworth's faith in the relevance of art. This confidence was strengthened in adversity, as she later told Mullins that outside events supplied 'the moral climate in which my sculpture is produced' ('Barbara Hepworth', Barbara Hepworth Exhibition 1970, exh. cat. Hakone Open-Air Museum, Japan, 1970 unpag.).  In Cantate Domino the response was specifically religious, as the title is the opening phrase of Psalm 98. Hepworth may also have recognised in this text her concerns with the landscape: 'Let the sea roar, and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein; Let the floods clap their hands; Let the hills be joyful together before the Lord' (Psalm 98:7-9). This conjunction was reinforced by photographs of the sculpture seen in front of the tower of St Ives Parish Church and in the countryside (Hodin 1961, pl.244). Soon after completion, it was exhibited in the 'Altar Furniture and Religious Sculpture' section of British Artist Craftsmen (1959-60); once acquired by the Tate, Hepworth wrote to the Director Norman Reid: 'It was intended to be reserved as a Headstone for my grave in St Ives ... I only mention this because I have always considered this a religious work' (27 Nov. 1967, Tate Gallery Acquisitions files).  Other works combined references to religious music with vertical forms, notably Ascending Form (Gloria) and the contemporary carving Figure (Requiem), 1957 (BH 230, Estate of the artist, repr. Hodin 1961, pl.230). They were the most abstract manifestation of a renewed spirituality in her work following the traumas of the death of her son, Paul Skeaping, in 1953 and the definitive separation from Ben Nicholson, with his marriage to Felicitas Vogler in 1957. In 1954, she carved a Madonna and Child for St Ives Parish Church (BH 193, repr. Hodin 1961, pl.193) which, together with the painting Two Figures (Heroes) (Tate Gallery T03155), served as a memorial to her son. The realism of this work stands in contrast to Cantate Domino, and may be seen in relation to Hepworth's earlier disenchantment with Henry Moore's Northampton Madonna, 1943-4 (St Matthew's, Northampton, repr. David Sylvester, Henry Moore Volume 1 Sculpture and Drawings: 1921-48, 1949, p.140, LH 226), which she had considered 'smug' and as using 'sentiment as a substitute for strength' (letter to Herbert Read, [30 Dec. 1946], Sir Herbert Read Archive, University of Victoria, B.C.). By contrast, the abstract Cantate Domino andAscending Form (Gloria) used a formal language which was integral to the stylistic concerns of her contemporary sculpture. In 1969-70 (when a spillage from the oil tanker Torrey Canyon threatened the Cornish coast) she told Mullins:  My sculpture has often seemed to me like offering a prayer at moments of great unhappiness. When there has been a threat to life - like the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, or now the menace of pollution - my reaction has been to swallow despair, to make something that rises up, something that will win. In another age ... I would simply have carved cathedrals. (ibid.)    These more public crises were the subject of much post-war sculpture and provide a further context for Cantate Domino. In Rotterdam - a city almost completely flattened by wartime bombing - Ossip Zadkine's The Destroyed City, 1946-53 (Leuvesluis, Rotterdam, repr. Gaston-Louis Marchal, Ossip Zadkine: La Sculpture ... Toute la vie, Rodez, 1992, p.121) addressed themes of suffering and regeneration through a figure with uplifted arms. This appears to be indebted directly to Rodin's Prodigal Son, c.1889 - which Read illustrated in The Art of Sculpture, 1956 (repr. pl.189); both take the very pose which is sometimes recognised in Hepworth's sculpture. Soon after, Naum Gabo built the Bijenkorf Construction, 1956-7 (N.V. Magazijn De Bijenkorf, Coolsingel, Rotterdam, repr. Steven A. Nash and Jörn Merkert, Naum Gabo Sixty Years of Constructivism, exh. cat. Dallas Museum of Fine Art, 1985, p.42, fig.50, no.67.5), also in Rotterdam. This took to a monumental scale his simpler submission for theUnknown Political Prisoner competition in 1952 (e.g. Model for a 'Monument to the Unknown Political Prisoner', 1952, Tate Gallery T02187, repr. ibid. p.127, pl. 45, no.61.2), which raised up finely tapering bows. Hepworth knew this work as she was a fellow prize-winner in the competition. Beyond the formal similarity of the open rising form, the asymmetry and organicism of Cantate Domino establishes a human dimension and scale more personal than Gabo's monument.  In making the selection of works to be submitted to the São Paolo Bienal in 1959, the British Council's Lilian Somerville preferred Cantate Domino to the contemporary carving Figure (Nanjizal) (Tate Gallery T00352), which Hepworth herself was keen to send (Festing 1995, p.238). The bronze may have been preferred for the practicalities of travel; in any case, Hepworth's award of the International Prize followed and a cast (3/6) was acquired for the Museu de Arte Moderna São Paolo. Another cast is in the Middelheimpark in Antwerp (4/6). As Hepworth told Norman Reid, she intended Cantate Domino for her grave but local by-laws ensured that 'it was pointedly refused on account of it being too high' (27 Nov. 1967, Tate Gallery Acquisitions files), the limit being two feet six inches (Festing 1995, p.305). The artist's cast had passed to the Tate before this decision was reversed; her grave is marked with a simple stone and a cast of Ascending Form (Gloria) is now placed at the entrance to Longstone Cemetery, Carbis Bay.  Matthew GaleMarch 1998 (Source, Tate.org)

标题：《歌唱于主》（"O Sing unto the Lord"）
艺术家：芭芭拉·赫普沃斯（Barbara Hepworth，1903-1975）
创作日期：1958年
材质：青铜（Bronze）
尺寸：2095×530×505毫米
入藏编号：t00956（泰特美术馆）
捐赠信息：由艺术家本人于1967年捐赠，铸件为6/6版。

《歌唱于主》（"O Sing unto the Lord"）这一标题，点明了这件雕塑鲜明的宗教属性。这契合了芭芭拉·赫普沃斯1950年代创作的整体脉络：作品既关联个人心绪，也回应公共议题，而这种属性通过雕塑向上舒展的形态得以彰显。《歌唱于主》的原型是两个由平面构成的纵深菱形结构，前后均呈开放式。下方菱形的结构更为厚重紧凑，上方菱形的顶端则向外舒展。其构图几乎与尺寸稍小的《上升形态（荣耀）》（1958年，BH 239，艺术家私人收藏，引自霍丁1961年版图版239）完全一致，后者多了一块带圆形穿孔的背板，用以封闭上部造型。

这件雕塑遵循赫普沃斯一贯的创作流程制作：先以膨胀铝搭建雕塑骨架（armature），再在预制的独立平面上附着石膏（plaster）。时任赫普沃斯助手的布莱恩·沃尔（Brian Wall）回忆，创作时先确定轮廓，再制作连接两个菱形的内部饰条，最后完成上部造型间的深U形结构（1996年5月3日与笔者访谈）。首件铸坯于富勒姆的艺术青铜铸造厂制作，并于1958年展出；1959年3月正进行后续铸制（1959年3月10日发票，TGA 965档案）。铸制过程中，内部饰条被焊接至左侧；据沃尔回忆，赫普沃斯对该缝隙的闭合效果并不满意（1996年5月3日访谈）。上部造型的重量引发了结构问题：1959年末赫普沃斯首次纽约展览中，编号1/6的铸件在运抵时，腰部的焊接接头发生断裂（赫普沃斯致彼得·金佩尔信，1959年9月24日，TGA 965档案）；这件铸件正是从全美巡展的《英国艺术家手工艺人》展运回后，需要在铸造厂修复的那件（赫普沃斯秘书玛格丽特·莫尔致彼得·金佩尔信，1961年4月27日，TGA 965档案）。布莱恩·沃尔也曾回忆修复过一件铸件（1996年5月3日访谈）。入藏泰特的艺术家自留铸件，曾在工作室花园放置八年（1959-1967年）。其表面覆盖棕褐色的粉霜状涂层，可能源于青铜氧化，或是赫普沃斯为获得白色氧化包浆（patination）而使用酸牛奶的结果（泰特美术馆保护报告）。

多位评论家都曾提及这件作品构图的张力。迈克尔·谢泼德（Michael Shepherd）写道："金属的韧性，与如同种子卷须舒展般的有机弹性，同向上伸展的姿态——宛如张开的双手——融为一体。由此，具象联想的多重意蕴，与作品本身纯粹的抽象属性，共同构成了独立的精神统一体。"（谢泼德1963年，[第39页]）

马林斯（Mullins）也采纳了这一具象解读视角。他称这件作品比《上升形态（荣耀）》"更具狂喜之感"，并补充道，两件作品"均是对人类双手合十祈祷、赞颂姿态的自由风格化演绎"（《芭芭拉·赫普沃斯》，载《芭芭拉·赫普沃斯1970年展》，日本箱根露天美术馆1970年展，无页码）。以此观之，反射的造型或可唤起祈祷之手的意象，比如阿尔布雷希特·丢勒（Albrecht Dürer）1508年的名作《手部研究》（阿尔贝蒂娜博物馆，维也纳，引自沃尔特·L.施特劳斯《阿尔布雷希特·丢勒全集素描》第二卷：1500-1509，纽约1972年版，第1033页）。

尽管赫普沃斯本人并未明确给出这种具象解读，但马林斯的评价——源于与她的对话——却反映了她对自身作品乃至雕塑整体精神性的一贯看法。在致赫伯特·里德（Herbert Read）的信中，谈及大英博物馆收藏的雕塑时，她断言："唯有秉持肯定态度的社会，方能孕育雕塑——无论是原始社会，还是为存续而战的社会……基于对自然生命力与人类精神升华的坚定信仰"（1953年1月18日，赫伯特·里德爵士档案，不列颠哥伦比亚省维多利亚大学）。她将后者等同于"宗教感性"，并补充道："在与自然力量的理解深度紧密绑定的艺术[雕塑]中，在依赖生命活力与运动才能被理解的艺术中，你必须在社会本身中寻找动态的相互作用"（同上）。这种将雕塑视为危机时期社会与精神能量结合、并汲取自然潜在力量的认知，是赫普沃斯坚信艺术价值的核心。这种信念在逆境中得到强化，正如她后来告知马林斯，外部事件为"我的雕塑创作提供了道德氛围"（《芭芭拉·赫普沃斯》，载《芭芭拉·赫普沃斯1970年展》，日本箱根露天美术馆1970年，无页码）。

在《歌唱于主》中，这种回应尤为明确地指向宗教，因为该标题正是《诗篇》98篇的开篇之句。赫普沃斯或许也从这段经文中感受到了与景观的共鸣："愿沧海咆哮，充满其中；愿世界与其中居民，都拍掌欢呼。愿洪水拍掌；愿群山在耶和华面前一同欢乐。"（《诗篇》98:7-9）这种关联因雕塑在圣艾夫斯教区教堂塔楼前与乡野中的摄影作品而得到强化（霍丁1961年版，图版244）。作品完成后不久，便被纳入《英国艺术家手工艺人》展的"祭坛家具与宗教雕塑"单元（1959-1960年）；被泰特美术馆入藏后，赫普沃斯致馆长诺曼·里德信中写道："这件作品本拟作为我在圣艾夫斯墓地的墓碑……我提及此事，只因我始终认为这是一件宗教作品"（1967年11月27日，泰特美术馆入藏档案）。

其他作品也将宗教音乐与垂直造型相结合，尤以《上升形态（荣耀）》与同期雕刻作品《形象（安魂曲）》（1957年，BH 230，艺术家私人收藏，引自霍丁1961年版，图版230）为代表。在1953年其子保罗·斯基平去世、1957年与本·尼科尔森彻底决裂（后者与费利西塔斯·福格勒成婚）的创伤之后，这类作品是她创作中重现精神性的最抽象体现。1954年，她为圣艾夫斯教区教堂创作了《圣母子》（BH 193，引自霍丁1961年版，图版193），该作品与绘画《双形象（英雄）》（泰特美术馆T03155）一同作为其子的纪念物。这件作品的写实风格与《歌唱于主》形成鲜明对比，也可与赫普沃斯早年对亨利·摩尔《北安普顿圣母像》（1943-1944年，圣马太教堂，北安普顿，引自大卫·西尔维斯特《亨利·摩尔第一卷：雕塑与素描1921-1948》1949年版，第140页，LH 226）的失望相联系——她曾认为该作品"故作温情"，并以"感伤替代力量"（致赫伯特·里德信，[1946年12月30日]，赫伯特·里德爵士档案，不列颠哥伦比亚省维多利亚大学）。相较之下，抽象的《歌唱于主》与《上升形态（荣耀）》所使用的形式语言，与其同期雕塑的风格关切紧密契合。1969-1970年（当时"托里峡谷号"油轮泄漏事故威胁康沃尔海岸），她告诉马林斯："在我看来，我的雕塑常常像是在极度痛苦时献上的祈祷。当生命受到威胁时——比如广岛的原子弹，或是如今的污染威胁——我的反应是咽下绝望，创作向上升腾的事物，一件能赢得胜利的事物。在另一个时代……我只会雕刻大教堂。"（同上）

这些更具公共性的危机，是战后大量雕塑的主题，也为《歌唱于主》提供了进一步的创作背景。在鹿特丹——这座几乎在战时轰炸中被完全夷平的城市——奥西普·扎德金（Ossip Zadkine）的《被毁的城市》（1946-1953年，勒夫斯卢伊斯，鹿特丹，引自加斯东-路易·马尔沙尔《奥西普·扎德金：雕塑……毕生之作》，罗德兹1992年版，第121页），通过一个高举双臂的形象，探讨了苦难与重生的主题。该作品似乎直接借鉴了罗丹的《浪子回头》（约1889年）——里德在《雕塑的艺术》（1956年）中曾配图该作品（引自图版189）；两件作品均采用了有时被认为是赫普沃斯雕塑中出现的姿态。不久之后，瑙姆·加博（Naum Gabo）为鹿特丹创作了《比延科夫构造型》（1956-1957年，N.V.德·比延科夫百货公司，库尔斯林格，鹿特丹，引自史蒂文·A.纳什和约恩·默克特《瑙姆·加博：六十年构成主义》，达拉斯美术馆1985年展，第42页，图50，编号67.5）。该作品将其1952年为《未知政治犯》竞赛创作的简约方案放大为纪念性尺度（例如《〈为未知政治犯所作的纪念碑〉模型》，1952年，泰特美术馆T02187，引自同上，第127页，图版45，编号61.2），该模型由精细收窄的弓形结构向上延伸。赫普沃斯知晓该作品，因为她也是该竞赛的获奖选手之一。除了开放式向上造型的形式相似性，《歌唱于主》的不对称性与有机性，赋予了比加博纪念碑更具个人色彩的人文尺度与体量。

在1959年圣保罗双年展的作品遴选过程中，英国文化协会的莉莲·萨默维尔选择了《歌唱于主》，而非赫普沃斯本人希望送去的同期雕刻作品《形象（南吉扎尔）》（泰特美术馆T00352）（费斯廷1995年版，第238页）。选择青铜铸件或许是出于运输便利；无论如何，赫普沃斯最终斩获国际奖，编号3/6的铸件被圣保罗现代艺术博物馆收藏。另有一件铸件藏于安特卫普的米德尔海姆公园（4/6）。正如赫普沃斯告知诺曼·里德，她本欲将《歌唱于主》用作自己的墓碑，但当地市政条例以"尺寸过高"为由"明确拒绝"（1967年11月27日，泰特美术馆入藏档案），当地规定的高度上限为两英尺六英寸（费斯廷1995年版，第305页）。艺术家自留铸件在该决定反转前已归入泰特；她的墓碑仅为一块简单的石碑，而《上升形态（荣耀）》的铸件如今安放在卡比斯湾朗斯通公墓的入口处。

马修·盖尔
1998年3月
（来源：泰特官网）