TL;DR
Get art and craft supplies delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
The Whitney Museum’s exhibition “Roy Lichtenstein: Like New,” described by Hyperallergic as the artist’s first major survey in more than 30 years, has drawn a critical review from Alex Da Corte. The review says the exhibition’s recreations and playful elements muddy the question of how Lichtenstein’s borrowings from comics, advertising and other artists read today.
A Hyperallergic review of the Whitney Museum’s exhibition “Roy Lichtenstein: Like New” argues that the artist’s familiar comic-book imagery and borrowings from other art now risk reading as self-parody rather than satire. The exhibition, which the review calls Lichtenstein’s first major survey in more than 30 years, brings together more than 130 works and new recreations; reviewer and artist Alex Da Corte says its playful presentation can obscure the questions raised by Lichtenstein’s art.
The review describes an exhibition spanning more than 130 paintings, sculptures, drawings and prints. Da Corte writes that he expected the curators’ research into the sources of the works to reveal something new. He says he was initially not disappointed, pointing to material on Lichtenstein’s teacher, Hoyt Sherman, and the teaching method that influenced the artist.
Sherman’s “Flash Labs” asked students to observe objects briefly in a darkened room and then draw them. The exhibition includes a 15-minute reenactment in which Da Corte plays Sherman. The review also describes recreated murals, including “Greene Street Mural” (1983), nearly 100 feet long, and “Super Sunset Billboard” (1967), installed in the Whitney’s west-facing window.
Da Corte’s central criticism is that such jokes and staging “muddied the waters” around Lichtenstein’s work. His review frames the issue as a change in how the paintings land: works once understood as satirical treatments of American ideals may lose their impact when their charm and recognizable visual language become ends in themselves. That is the reviewer’s interpretation, not a reported consensus among visitors or critics.
When Lichtenstein’s Satire Fades
The review raises a question central to viewing an artist whose images are both instantly recognizable and built from borrowing: does familiarity preserve the work’s bite, or blunt it? Lichtenstein drew on comic strips, advertising and the compositions of other artists. Da Corte suggests that the same visual appeal that made the work memorable can make it feel like a repeat of its own style.
The issue matters to the exhibition because its recreations and playful interventions shape how visitors encounter the paintings. The show does not only gather Lichtenstein’s works; it also stages parts of his artistic history. Da Corte’s criticism suggests that this presentation may distract from, rather than clarify, the tension between satire, appropriation and artistic reputation. The source provides no visitor data or other reviews that would establish how widely this reading is shared.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Sherman’s Lessons and Lichtenstein’s Sources
Lichtenstein credited Hoyt Sherman, his teacher at Ohio State University, with teaching him how to see. The review notes that he gave his first son “Hoyt” as a middle name and later endowed the university’s Hoyt L. Sherman Studio Art Center. Sherman’s brief-viewing exercises offered a different approach from conventional life drawing, and the Whitney’s reenactment presents that history through a staged classroom scene.
Lichtenstein’s best-known work translated the visual language of comic strips and advertising into paintings and prints, while also drawing on established art-historical sources, including works associated with Pablo Picasso, Claude Monet and Chinese classical painters such as Mi Youren. The exhibition’s source research and recreated installations, as described in the review, place these influences alongside the work rather than treating the paintings as isolated images.
““muddied the waters””
— Alex Da Corte, Hyperallergic reviewer and artist
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Broad Is the Critical Response?
The supplied source is a single critical review, not a report of a broader institutional or public response. It does not establish whether other reviewers agree with Da Corte, how visitors are responding, or whether the Whitney has addressed the criticism. The material also does not provide the exhibition’s opening and closing dates or a publication date for the review.
Da Corte’s claim that Lichtenstein’s work has shifted from satire toward self-parody is an interpretive judgment. The exhibition’s inclusion of recreations and educational material is described in the review, but the source does not provide the curators’ response to the criticism or explain how they intended those elements to shape visitors’ readings.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Exhibition’s Reception Ahead
The review leaves the discussion with the exhibition’s presentation and the question of how its works function for contemporary audiences. Further reviews, curatorial comments or visitor responses could show whether Da Corte’s concerns are shared or contested. The source does not announce a related event, a museum response or a scheduled next development, so no specific follow-up is confirmed.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What is the news about Roy Lichtenstein?
Hyperallergic published a critical review of the Whitney Museum’s survey “Roy Lichtenstein: Like New,” arguing that the artist’s once-satirical visual style may now read as self-parody.
What does the review say is in the Whitney exhibition?
The review describes more than 130 works, including paintings, sculptures, drawings and prints, as well as a reenacted “Flash Lab” and recreations of several Lichtenstein murals.
Who is Alex Da Corte?
Alex Da Corte is an artist and the reviewer who wrote the Hyperallergic assessment. The source also identifies him as one of the exhibition’s curators and says he appears as Hoyt Sherman in the reenacted classroom video.
Is the review’s criticism an established consensus?
No. It is Da Corte’s interpretation. The supplied material does not include other reviews, visitor responses or a response from the Whitney that would establish a broader consensus.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
