Saturday, February 20, 2010

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

early 2010 january

for those who are reading this blog for the first time, you should refer to the very first
post entitled 'letter of intent'. it helps this all make sense.
the first sunday in january was very cold and i decided to warm up at the modern and
check out gabriel orozco- an artist i have always liked. everybody had the same idea, so
there was the crowds to deal with but i did get to see the show. overall i have always
appreciated the early work,as in the back space on the top floor. the zipcode ?
scroll and the other small, delicate items are my favorites. otherwise i think he has gotten
lost in the cleverness and the show lacks a substantiality. the circular color paintings/drawings
etc. -all with the same concept - do not fit, and i could never figure out where they came from
to begin with. way too much real estate was devoted to this idea.

the best moment was discovering a few beautiful jos beuys drawings in the rothschild
collection. it made the visit worth the while.

one other day i went to PS1 to see '1969' and it is a very good show. never thought i would
have found so impressive a helen frankenthaler (yesss). the building itself
is such an amazing place, almost like being somewhere in germany. the mood etc., and
on a crystal clear very cold day in the winter the light coming through the windows
makes it all the more special.
really enjoyed also the 'between spaces' as a comprehensive overview of whats up.
i am following a number of these artists that are in this show and will comment on
them in a later blog, particularly heather rowe

other than that, it was with great difficulty that i tried to find something to grasp on
to in the work by helmut federle. i know his early work well and he has had a bit of a
journey- read the brooklyn rail interview- and i wanted to be enthusiastic about
this work but it was like pulling teeth.

discovered anthony mccall both at sean kelly and the margulies collection in miami.
all the credit he is now getting- years after- he deserves.

i was in paris once and the modern museum had a robert irwin retrospective and
i was floored by most of it. the curtain walls of light. same here at zwirner.

why did mary boone cram 20 years worth of jos beuys into her gallery that way? this arrangement did not do this work the justice it deserves. it boggles the mind, the extent of it.
this needed a museum like show on par with the manzoni show at G.

in miami briefly, the miami museum had a 'high brow' show entitled 'space as
medium' and it explores 'space oriented artistic strategies'. the small catalogue
is a treasure, the work does not nec re-inforce and the show needs to be in new york
to be taken seriously- as it should. sorry miami.
in another set of galleries,there was a painted cardboard environment by carlos bunga that
is worth noting here.

back in ny, there were two shows on drawings: helio oiticica and xenakis (drawing ctr)
that are credit worthy on all counts.

and' look again'- at the marlborough on re-appropriation and context. i always try and
follow the work of tony feher and this show had one of his signature pieces strewn
about as is the intent. i am an admirer of feher for many years and -generally-
like his work, but particularly when he stays simple and clear. there were some
other pleasant surprises here.

this has the feel of a journal , so far, and the serious critique will come later, trust me!

Monday, February 15, 2010

2009. summary

best to read 'letter of intent first. its the first blog.

i am starting at a 'beginning' by in brief course reviewing 2009.

at the beginning of this year i went back and reviewed three of the most important group
shows of 2009. they were still standing. one, at the kitchen curated by debra singer,
which had abstraction as a theme. it is a sorry state we find abstraction in today if this
is any indicator. it included a number of 'favorites' of the critics at the moment. and later
i will bring a number of them up in the context of 'art investment' because thats an issue.
suffice to say i was wholely disappointed in the content of the show but not the idea and
the experience, thats the sad part. it is in the memory and if i walked away with any thought
it was the appreciation of the trouble the curator went through to mount a show on
this very important topic. too bad the art- much of it- was and is , sad.

and then to white columns which had its end of year show entitled 'looking back'.
this review had a few notable inclusions and one outstanding piece. the issue of
'reduction' daresay 'minimalism' keeps popping up in the art world if for no other reason
then one would expect that given the place it has in the american art-psyche. it is-
for me- the greatest pleasure to find a work of art- hopefully an artist- who can in -
a thoughtful, meaningful and visually succinct way( think feliz gonzalez torres!!!!)
achieve. i thought the piece as you walked in white columns on the left wall by
matias faldbakken - before you go up the steps. the 'bulletin board ' wall. was a
superb example of what i speak of above. it was of tile . when i had the chance,
i went 'online' and was hoping to find example after example of this caliber from this
artist and was unfortunately disappointed. this is a theme i will come back to over and
over again: how can it be an artist like FGTorres
using the most simple materials create one masterpiece after the other, and yet we have
artists that can only make one or two good pieces .what a shame. this piece was outstanding though.


i must mention the last group show of interest. namely the one mounted at andrea rosen.
entitled 'the perpetual dialogue' there was a lot to see and, with exception of a few pieces,
was exactly what it was billed. a cacaphony.

so now some quick thoughts:

thank you to larry G. for the peace offering , or should i say guilt payment,given to the art world in mounting the piero manzoni
show- which was beyond museum quality. same can be said for the picasso show.

roni horn. a master, or is it a mistress ,of minimalism

i was delighted to see everybody- well almost- get on the bandwagon and trash the despicable
decadence and pomposity of the urs fischer experience at the new museum. this museum has
lost track of its original mission.

for the more intellectually minded - as opposed to 'entertainment' driven- the leon ferrari
and mira schendel 'tangled alphabets' at the MOMA.

speaking of the MOMA- yes it is this 'entertainment' question that keeps popping up.
witness pipilotti rist turning the entire feel of the museum into a pink (literally) pussy-
cat hookah,lounge . all it was lacking was the smoking stations and a rolling bar.
it undeniably created a mood though. and it was entrancing.

i did have a bit of an eye-opening at the franz west show in baltimore and have a deeper
respect for his work. not nec an appreciation- but respect is enough. i will mention that
the two sculptures installed in the marty margulies collection/warehouse in miami
by West are two of the finest pieces of art on view in that city.

artbasel in miami was a bit of a bust and i went away - notes in hand- sort of left only
with the memory of the FGTorres pieces in the de la cruz collection. this is a comprehensive
and superb collection of his work. and the building is beautiful.
speaking of miami i wish i could say something nice about the rubell collection but i
cant. i dont know how these two get away with it; actually i do know and thats the
sad thing about it. thoroughly lacking in thoughtfulness and completely obsessed with
'entertainment' quotient and 'investment'. 'pump up the volume' rubells!!!! i respect
the deep interest in art but am very suspect of the rest of the merchandising.

sol lewitt at mass MOCA : there is nothing more to say. he has taken the old world
notion of mural and fresco and the most elementary principles of graphic art and idea
and has combined them like no other has or ever will. supersize us sol!

yes, to those who write in the forum, a special mention for james castle.

a special mention to robert kinmont- at alexander and bonin

drop dead perfection of gerhard richter at marian goodman.

finally, here are artists to watch. some are known. and i have very explicit things to say
about the work here and later briefly.

gedi sibony. pretty much on target but frequently 'slips up' in the same way that
tony feher does. i have much more to say on this artist in a later blog.

jacob kassay. his show at 11 rivington was superb, his two pieces at artbasel were entirely
lacking, his piece at the kitchen was one of the more memorable but he has to mount his
work on a stiffer material,.he is playing havoc with the canvas and eventually the canvas
is going to give way under the pressure, and collapse, so start thinking board or wood panel.


sarah crowner. is on a trajectory, no question about it.

william cordova. the drawings and work on paper are some of the best work of its kind
being done today. some of the smaller sculptures resonate and he ought to watch out
with the larger pieces because they do not work at all.

jim lee has a lot of potential and not much time left. if he would exhibit some discipline and not be so all over the place. he needs to focus.

an art dealer; frank elbaz in paris has - without ques- his finger on the pulse.
davide balula ( also in a superb small piece in a no longer existing small space - a delight- 'fake estate') and gyan panchal. the latter is the one who sold out the entire booth at the
armory with his simple constructions etc. everybody walked right by the booth and
it was only one collector who had the vision and understanding.

oh and a special mention to james hickey for his standing room
only thoughtful expose' of current afflictions of the art world. issues of quality vs. quantity.
assembly line art and art education at the expense of imagination.


my next blog will be on early 2010.

thank you for reading this and i appreciate comments.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

letter of intent

i thought about it and decided that it would be best to state at the outset
what my intention is in writing this blog and also offer a few ideas on
where my opinions on art- in general- land.
for those that have read the first blog, there is a bit of re-arranging going
on here so definitely -bear with me.
as i said, i have no prior art education save a introductory course in art
history given in a college auditorium with 300 other students. i had two
semesters of this and then a three year job as a slide projectionist for the
art history department. it was at this post, sitting in the back of the seminar
room switching slides , that i got a fairly comprehensive knowledge of
art history minus the contemporary. for this i was left up to my own devices
and this was no problem whatsoever. the interest is there.
i travel the galleries and art museums and pretty much a considerable part
of my life is involved in this activity. i have never written about art before.
BUT, as anyone who knows me will agree , i most definitely have my opinions.

i think i have a very unique 'take' on what i see. it is certainly not mainstream
and while it could be easily condemned as 'reactionary' by some, it isnt at all.
so the only way you will be able to come to an educated conclusion is to read
this on a continuing basis.

firstly though, i must let the readers/followers know -somewhat- my overall
opinion of the art world as i see it today. furthermore, there are very important
issues that have to be addressed and i intend to interject them when i feel they
fit and eventually give each of them the full attention they deserve.

i think the best thing is to start with what i absolutely am not looking for in art.
heres' some words: merry, fun-like, happy, twisted, strangeness in the extreme,
ugly, fantasy-like, messy, mischievous, humorous, sick, etc. do you begin to get
the picture.
i dont care whether the work is an installation, a film/video, a mural, a work of
of sculpture, a painting, a drawing, all these. it just matters whether the artist
has been able to achieve the point in a 'clean' way. what could i ever mean by
that! well if you eliminate the art that has any of the above characteristics- the
list of abhorrences, you have the idea. i prefer a disciplined resolution.

these comments above do not refer to art historical material because the same
can not apply. art changed in fundamental ways in the 70s: happenings, the
role of women in art expanded greatly, the introduction of popular culture
etc. it is here at this point that the boundaries were expanded ,some of this
was good and a lot of it was bad. i restrict the list above to mostly art that is
contemporaneous. although there are artists that began their careers in the 70s,
some of whom still work today, and they are 'fair game' for criticism.

i will give you an example of what i mean above in the following way:
take gerhard richter: his work has all the formal principles , it is-in series- a
thoughtful, clear, well organized- in a way, exercise- one after the other that
transcends the common, it is beautiful to look at, it challenges the viewer, there
is absolutely nothing blatant about it, 'sublimal', compositonally superb- each one.
i know the description is well-worn, and i could belabor the positives
but its the truth- all of it.
i dont mind social commentary, i like it, but not when it is egocentric, sloppy,
blatant, leaving very little to the imagination. for example i like felix gonzalez
torres a lot -one masterpiece after the other, and detest tracy emin. i want my
imagination to be challenged. i am not interested in the obvious, the raw. i
dont like sex and violence explicit in art at all, i have enough of that by just
turning on the news. save the political for elsewhere. i realize there is a need for
some of it, but have no for over-saturation.

there is this issue of 'beauty'. in fact all of these issues about art that pop up.
cogency, relevance, etc. the only way is for me to write about it as i see it.
and when i see a piece that i feel exhibits qualities i like and i think are important
i will just say so, and say why. and when i dismiss, just go back to the list.

i think this above touches on the whole notion of the mission of art and how
it has veered towards 'entertainment'. and 'popular-ness'. there is no question
that i prefer a far more elitist definition of art and the function it should play.
not that the art museum or the gallery for that matter should be a repository
in the traditional sense, but certainly not a entertainment complex either.
there is way too much 'dumb-down' going on in the art world today for the
same miserable reasons that afflict politics and the entertainment world.
soundbite and scandal and sex and violence sells and so many have succumbed
to this for revenue or what-ever. take motorcycles and tim burton as examples.

a final example. i went to the super-flex show at peter blum. there were three
videos. the first, a boring economics lecture ( and i love economics), second , the
video that everybody is talking and writing about on the flooded mcdonalds.
i got the point rather quickly and did not want to devote an entire 21 minutes
to this. i went to the desk to look at the reading materials and was totally taken
by the empty room across from the desk; its austere beauty, the light, it raised so many
questions. and finally the ' burning car' video which i thought was excellent in every
way. it is a fine work of art. a fine video, it captures in every way what you want
in a good work of art in that medium. just a car burning, thats all it takes.