| 
 Fay Wood  By RAYMOND J. 
        STEINER  A 
        FEW YEARS back — after viewing her solo show in Woodstock, New York 
        — I referred to Fay Wood as a “world-class Renaissance artist” — 
        she’s more than that. On a cool but bright sunny May morning, I visited 
        Fay at her Clove Church Studio in Saugerties, New York, and spent a couple 
        of hours browsing her studio, her home, her gardens, and — most 
        especially — her mind — and what a mind it is! Her studio, 
        a large, roomy space that was once a church — I remember it as attended 
        by congregants of the Assembly of God — is surrounded by gardens 
        and bluestone-lined paths that she and her husband Skip (a retired engineer) 
        have designed over the fifteen years they have occupied the grounds and 
        building. A stroll outside in the interconnected gardens largely amounts 
        to an extended view of her studio…but more of that later. 
 First, 
        let’s dispense with the statistical stuff, the measurable parts of her 
        life and career as a mother and an artist. The earliest entry in a scrapbook 
        lovingly assembled by her husband that covers her artistic endeavors and 
        accomplishments is from a newspaper article dated September 12, 1968. 
        She is singled out along with a few others from an exhibition of “Connecticut 
        Valley” artists for her “unusual figure study” of Ascent of Proserpine 
        —attesting to the fact that for at least forty years, Fay Woods 
        has been making her mark as an artist and, early on, standing somewhat 
        apart from her peers. Only six years after, an article reviewing the Springfield 
        Art League’s Fall Exhibits that included mention of her drawing, Girl 
        Watchers Revisited, has a marginal note put in by Fay: “This is the drawing 
        that got censored out of the show — I fought to get it in!!”  Still, 
        if Ascent of Proserpine struck the reviewer as “unusual” and Girl Watchers 
        left some jurors uneasy, a rather lengthy resume suggests that her art 
        was not so outré to have been excluded from group, solo, and invitational 
        shows both here and abroad — garnering, along the way, a fair share 
        of accolades and awards — since the early ‘70s. On the other hand, 
        a visit to her Clove Church Studio unequivocally sets her apart from the 
        ordinary. This is an artist who decidedly marches to her own drum! For 
        someone such as I who has to view a lot of stuff that tries to pass as 
        “art” in today’s free-wheeling art market, it is enormously refreshing 
        to see something beyond mere “innovation”, mere “shock art” that purports 
        to be the “very latest” in “cutting edge” art. There is a depth of sensibility 
        and vision in Fay Wood’s work that one sorely misses in the usual gallery/museum 
        fare. 
 Unfortunately, 
        that 1968 article did not offer a reproduction of Wood’s Ascent of Proserpine 
        — Girl Watchers Revisited was in fact “revisited” in a later (undated) 
        article and was accompanied by a reproduction of the drawing — but 
        if I am allowed some extrapolation from what now fills her studio cum 
        church, I have little difficulty in imagining her sculpted figure of Proserpine. 
        I hesitate to describe Fay Wood, other than to make note of her strikingly, 
        piercing blue eyes. Otherwise, this white-haired, soft-spoken woman is 
        a deceptively unlikely source of such intense, spiritual, far-sighted, 
        inventive, startling, and often ingeniously whimsical body of work. Although 
        she paints and draws as a foil (her word) for her sculptural “readymades” 
        — and paints and draws extremely well, whether figure or landscape 
        — Fay Wood is a quintessential 3-dimensional artist, imagining tangible 
        form from inchoate matter. And, as the term “readymade” implies, the matter 
        she fashions into art doesn’t, at bottom, really “matter” (pun intentional). 
        Though in her early days a sculptor of wood, she has since allowed her 
        vision to see beyond what we mortals perceive in “things” and has allowed 
        her art to encompass a world of objects, each discrete bit or piece subtly 
        transformed into something “other”.  
 One 
        might expect a resultant jumble of disparate parts but, in her hands — 
        like clay made into man — new objects turn magically into ‘beings’ 
        — and thus, what I see as the “spiritual” aspect of her art. As 
        a mother, she had already “created” life — but as most artist/mothers 
        quickly learn, soon discovered that parts of her “flesh and blood” could 
        — and for a time did — take her away from her life-long inclination 
        to create art. In addition to her children, 22 moves in 30 years, and 
        the perennial obstacles placed before any female artist, had taken a toll 
        on any chance of a settled, unified artistic vision to take firm root 
        in the depths of her creative soul — and Fate could not have dealt 
        her a more fortuitous hand, for who knows what rigid, formulistic viewpoint 
        might have been her fortune had she slipped into a cocoon of comforting 
        safety? Real art is almost always wrested from the chaos of our physical 
        world — especially when that world is filtered through our inner 
        spirit. When merely assembled — whether in brushstroke or material 
        — what we produce is simply — and aptly —called “assemblage” 
        — something any flood or hurricane can accomplish (and often does) 
        in the detritus they leave in their wakes. “Art”, however — and 
        with a capital “A” — is something different, something increasingly 
        rare in our no-holds-barred, anything-goes, ‘I’m all right — You’re 
        all right’, artworld. Since time immemorial, art implied mankind’s imprint 
        on what he/she sees, tastes, feels, smells and touches — not a mere 
        bringing together of what’s “out there”. To take some found metal objects, 
        a bunch of wire and a few dabs of paint and translate them into her prize-winning 
        Chanticleer at the National Sculpture Society’s 71st Annual Awards Exhibition 
        takes not only manual dexterity (which she unmistakably possesses and 
        credits to her father, a carpenter whose backsaw and miter box grace her 
        studio much like any other of her sculptures) but an aesthetic vision 
        (which she most definitely possesses) that transcends the mundane slapping 
        together of a few geometric forms painted in day-glo colors.  
 Attempting 
        to describe in words Fay Wood’s individual works — and there are 
        a literal church-full of them — is an impossible undertaking — 
        as fruitless as trying to capture her in words. Each — like her 
        — breathes an active life that belies the foursquare, solid image 
        that presents itself to the unwary eye. Even while sitting and chatting 
        in her studio for this profile, one could sense the kinetic energy impatiently 
        waiting to be released — like the incipient “cock-a-doodle-do” of 
        the silent Chanticleer waiting to be released while proudly standing atop 
        his roost. Indeed, Fay Wood’s energy bursts its bonds even outside her 
        studio.  I 
        mentioned her gardens — and it is clear to this fellow gardener 
        that her creativity is carried far beyond the confining walls of her “Clove 
        Church Studio”. I made the mistake (and I should have known better, having 
        read and absorbed Martin Buber’s I and Thou) of asking her the name of 
        one or two blooming plants (as a high-schooler, I worked for a landscaper 
        and took some pride in learning the Latin names of the flora I worked 
        with and temporarily forgot myself as we strolled her paths). Some minutes 
        later, she confided that she resents being asked the names of her flowers 
        since “they ought to be appreciated simply for themselves”. A point well 
        taken and one I should have anticipated since, while still in her studio, 
        she had already indicated that she disliked titling her pieces. And, by 
        the same token, she abhors the oft-requested ‘artist’s statement’ and 
        for the same reasons that I have railed against them in so many of my 
        past editorials — does not the art itself make the artist’s “statement”? 
        And so with her flowers…they really don’t need “titles” either. Mother 
        Nature’s art, like ours, ought to stand on its own — sans “expert” 
        definers and pundit-like interpreters. 
 And, 
        while I’m at it, neither does Fay Wood require definition or explication. 
        As I said above, though I once referred to her as a “world-class Renaissance 
        artist”, she is really much more than that. (For 
        more on Fay Wood and her extraordinary body of work, E-mail her at clovechurchstudio@hvc.rr.com 
        or, better yet, call her at (845) 246-7504 and arrange a visit to her 
        Clove Church Studio in Saugerties, NY)  |