Previous: has declared this area a no-sour-grapes zone (12)

Next: pac-mondrian (13)


Post #437 • December 24, 2004, 9:19 AM • 48 Comments

Anne Tschida for the Miami Herald: Pointed political messages with a Eurocentric bent.

Fabiola Santiago for the Miami Herald: Fellowship supports emerging art talent.

Judy Cantor for Street Weekly: Sidewalk Artist.

Carlos Suarez de Jesus for Street Weekly: 360 degrees.

Omar Sommereyns for Street Weekly: Honest, down-home painting.

Carlos Suarez de Jesus for Street Weekly: Suspension of disbelief.

UPDATE: Omar Sommereyns for Street Weekly: Interior motive.

Alfredo Triff for the Miami New Times: A Fine Sense of Place: Two recent installation projects succeed where others have failed.

Megan Kenny for the Broward/Palm Beach New Times: Artbeat.

Michael Mills for the Broward/Palm Beach New Times: Hamburg on Birdseed Buns: Performance artist Zhang Huan's canvas is his body.

A&E Art Review by Palm Beach Post Staff.

Gary Schwan for the Palm Beach Post: From armor to iron.

The PBP tries to wrap its brain around this newfangled arts blogging thing and doesn't quite manage it.




December 24, 2004, 6:49 PM

I refuse to bother with the Herald's sign-up foolishness. If it wants to inconvenience people, it needs to be worth it first. However, I was struck by the title of the review of what I assume is the show at MAC, "Pointed political messages with a Eurocentric bent." Just what I want from art. Sheez. Take it someplace else, please, like CNN or the United Nations.

From the review "360 degrees":

The writer notes Dan Flavin's "Monument for V. Tatlin," then states that "Flavin is concerned with executing works purged of metaphor and meaning." How nice (for Flavin, anyway), but if that's the case, what the hell was Flavin doing referencing Tatlin's Monument, which comes loaded with all manner of associations? Ask Martin Oppel.

The writer gives us a late-breaking news flash: Malevich is "credited with introducing the square into modern art." Funny, I thought the square had been around and utilized in art rather longer. Much, MUCH longer. Thank you, Street, just the same.

The writer quotes Carl Andre as saying ''I simply toppled Brancusi's Endless Column.'' Uh, right. Please excuse me for snickering, not to mention sneering. By the way, I simply morphed into a vastly different but superior version of the world's sexiest man. Somebody alert People mag.

Yes, I'm in a snarky mood. I'm flu-ish, and even less inclined than usual to suffer nonsense.



December 24, 2004, 7:33 PM

on general principle, I ususally go through the sign-up foolishness and feed it obviously false information, (ie random strings of letters for names), in hopes that they'll eventually get the message and drop it. But my cookie must have been deleted and the Herald wanted me to re-register, and yep: it's gotten much crazier. I agree with Jack - not worth it.

None of the Street's articles have a single illustration, unless you count the infected tonail clipart ad. Disgusting.

Newtimes articles are presented in an almost competent fashion, but with images smaller then Franklin's. And someone should tell them. It doesn't cost anything extra to run pictures in color on the internet, so you can have a color picutre online even if it's B/W in print. Hey you could have a few pictures online! It might even be possible for people to click and see a larger version?

The blog article was pretty hillarious. Hey franklin, what are YOUR favorite "eateries"? Who are some favorite famous people you've never met??

Good stuff.



December 24, 2004, 8:51 PM

I have yet to dive into the garbage, but Jack, stay "snarky". Seems to put a nice humorous edge on your cleaver.



December 24, 2004, 9:10 PM

Franklin you came by my studio and I wanted to thank you for turning me on to this artblog site. I love it. Just the other day I asked someone what a blog was... so now I know. Now if I could get me head out of my books long enuf...



December 24, 2004, 9:42 PM

I commend Omar Sommereyns for his review of the Lowe's show, American Paintings 1930-50, even though I feel he was too soft. Relative to prior reviews I've read by him, this one is more sensitive and measured, more serene, and I appreciated that in my current irritable mood from being sick. I hope this means growth or progress for him.

I saw the show when it opened. While there are some nice and/or rather interesting things in it, including Soyer's "Transients," one good Hopper would have blown the whole thing away. There was an inordinate amount of painfully mediocre, dated work by artists who are not only forgotten but deservedly so. I found it depressing, except as a purely American art historical exercise. The problem could have been helped significantly by much more judicious (and stingent) editing, because in this instance more was definitely less.



December 24, 2004, 9:50 PM

That was meant to be "stringent editing" above. Also, I wanted to add that this is precisely NOT the sort of show the Lowe needs to be doing, as it only digs them deeper into the hole of marginalization they've sunk into in the Miami art world. This is largely dusty, stale, so-what material, and, in my opinion, putting up a show like this at Basel time is roughly equivalent to wearing a sign that says "Kick me; I'm stupid." It's a shame, because the Lowe has the potential for doing considerably better.



December 24, 2004, 9:56 PM

My computer is not in the habit of helping me out any, but it does give me the Herald directly from the link on the blog. Maybe it is how I registered? Or the fact that I subscribe to the paper? I dunno.

The show at MAM sounds positively stuultifying. The reviewer seems surprised that European political "art" text is "long-winded and dense". What else? And why do we need to look at videos of slum kids boasting about shooting desperate people with familys to provide for? That is not my idea of elevated museum fare. Am I being "elitist here? I hope so.

Alesh, I certainly agree about illustration. Not only does it not cost anything on the web but by the same token there could be much more illustration, not less. This may just be a matter of maturation of the medium. As for the toenail ad, yeah - you see them on TV too, with little yellow creatures eating infected toe flesh. Just the thing to watch while you are eating lunch. Do people really have those infections? If so, I'm glad they wear shoes. On the other hand, if Andy W. were still around he could take that ad and turn it into a multimillion $ painting in no time.

I have not seen the show at the Lowe but i will. there are always a few surprises - good ones - in a show like that. (American paintings of the 30s to 50s). I saw a show like that over in Naples a few months ago, concentrating on Modernism rather than realism, and it was a real buffet of obscure gems. They may have a "kick me" sign on, Jack, but I think I will get a kick out of the show.

As for the blog squad, I would advise newspapers not to profile their critics this way. When you see & read stuff like this it is hard to take them seriously.

The Geometry show should probably be seen, as the critic says, for its "didactic nature". I dont think there is much there by way of sensual delight.

Most of the other stuff seems missable. There is a hot streak of desperation in what many artists are doing now - the guy who rolls in honey & birdseed and the like. We have really had enough of this kind of thing, i think.



December 24, 2004, 10:08 PM

Desperation is a good word for what drives a lot of people in general, not only artists. But what I want to know is what is it with the glue guns in this town? I've only been here a year perhaps its a cultural thing I don't know about....



December 24, 2004, 10:20 PM

Glue guns? What about them?



December 24, 2004, 10:38 PM

Just that I've noticed piles of stuff stuck together with glue guns in the local galleries and was wondering (there's that word) perhaps, is it archival?...



December 24, 2004, 10:47 PM

I hope not.



December 24, 2004, 11:02 PM

Re: registration, you guys might want to check out You can go there and type in the URL for the site that requires registration and it will give you a username and password to use, so you don't have to deal with the hassle of registering. You can also download an extension for your browser that will enter a username and password by right-clicking (or control-clicking, on a Mac) in the text box.



December 24, 2004, 11:14 PM

OldPro Just in Time,
Phew I was getting worried... Thanks for answering my question on Xmas eve but I was nervous about getting a glue gun for Xmas and wanted to know what to do with it if I did....
Now lets both go feed the homeless in peace...



December 25, 2004, 12:44 AM

Denise - thanks for the BugMeNot link. It galls me that the Herald requires registration when the Guardian, a far superior paper, does not. The BugMeNot site says that "Knight Ridder Digital are responsible for rolling out registration systems for news sites." Knight Ridder owns the Herald, of course.

Bookworm - my pleasure.

Oldpro, Alesh - newpaper sites typically recycle whatever illustrations they use for the print version of the article - hence the occasional appearance of black & white jpegs, which makes no freaking sense from a design stanpoint. Until the sites become something more than afterthoughts, we will see these problems over and over again.



December 25, 2004, 12:53 AM

It's Judy Cantor



December 25, 2004, 12:54 AM

You're welcome, bookworm, but I don't think i answered your question.

Seriously, I don't know if they are archival or not. Does anyone?



December 25, 2004, 1:13 AM

Franklin, you missed linking the Street review of the Bass show (Paris Moderne) by Sommereyns.



December 25, 2004, 1:36 AM

Judy - I apologize. Please imagine me slapping myself in the head. (You should see what I did to Carlos Suarez de Jesus's name once.)

Jack - thank you. It's up.

Re: glue guns - I might drop a note to these people and ask them.



December 25, 2004, 1:53 AM

Bookworm needs to contact the Utrecht art supply place on Dixie Hwy. I love going to Utrecht, by the way, even though I'm not an artist (sort of like some people love going to Home Depot). None of the other art supply places are as appealing to me. Go figure.



December 25, 2004, 3:05 AM

Is it just me, or is the review of John Espinosa's show based heavily on MoCA's press release? Which leads me to believe that his background info is much more interesting than his artwork (and it is).



December 25, 2004, 7:27 AM

As far as I can tell, after a fair of amount of googleing, there is no standard or study of the archival-ness of hot melt glue. This ANSI/NISO standard says "certain hot melt glues" are "generally recognized as safe to use" in the construction of exhibition cases for archival materials, but nothing direct.

On a personal anecdote, I went to school in a Fibers department. It was generally thought there that hot glue wasn’t archival. They would give you a lecture when you tried to use it as an adhesive. It would have meant a failing grade for the archival nuts in book-making. At minimum, it's taking the easy (and ugly) way out in most cases.

Lots of other physical standards for hot melt glue can be found over at ASTM


Jerome du Bois

December 25, 2004, 7:35 AM

Hey, oldpro, (who my wife calls "oldgeezoid:")

When the cops come busting into your house night after night, for years on end, hassling you about the art you make and threatening to take you to a tiny cell for an undetermined length of time, just because you hung bleeding from the ceiling for your people, or for all people, then you can criticize Zhang Huan. Otherwise, in my opinion, you ought to shut your priveleged mouth, go grade some student papers, and then go piss up a rope.

Zhang Huan's been to hell. Where you been, oldpro?


PS to all: Why the hell are you people talking about glue guns?



December 25, 2004, 11:31 PM

to Jerome and Others, Old Pro etc.....
This was my first blogging experience and I made the mistake of mentioning glue guns in what was meant to be a satirical fashion...
About my observation of the local art scene...
Old Pro satisfied me by assuring me that the work created by piles of stuff stuck together with glue guns was NOT archival and I was greatly relieved so that at least in ten years time others would not have to view the same pile of stuff...
The literal rampage that went on afterwards was meant to be helpful by all of you but I guess subtle humor or inuendo is not really useful in blogging... I will try to keep it in check in the future...
OR perhaps I can just glue my mouth shut...



December 26, 2004, 1:16 AM

Just to beat it to death a little further, bookworm, I really did not assure you of anything except that my hope was, in light of the "art" you were describing, that the glue was not archival whatsoever.

But please keep on posting. Don't let ole Jerome discourage you. He has his moments.



December 26, 2004, 3:00 AM

Jerome: Do you believe that anyone who has "been to hell" can no longer do anything wrong?



December 26, 2004, 6:49 AM


there's nothing wrong with a satirical comment being taken at face value. actually, it can be quite delicious...

and the resulting discussion has been both amusing and enlightening, especially cliff's (the same cliff that recently won the CC grant I wonder??) all-but-definitive answer.

Our actions often have unintended consequences; it's wonderful when those consequences are so sublime.

Art that, because of its nature, disolves over time can be all the more beautiful for it. But if it's not the artist's intent, it's sort of pathetic (one of the really big abstract expressionists used house paint which fell off the canvases after a few years . . . what'shisname help me out oldpro??).


I sympathize with your outrage... i'm going to go read up on Huan.



December 26, 2004, 7:43 AM

Alesh: I'm not oldpro but I'm old. Pollock used Duco, an outdoor sign paint that was sometimes applied to houses when durability was desired or a smooth look was considered a virtue. It is not falling off his canvases, however. (He used it because it was very oily with tremendous surface tension that caused the paint to congeal as it flew through the air.)

Clyfford Still's work tended to shed during his early life because he did not honor the fat-over-lean idea that makes oil paint remain stuck to itself for a longer period of time. A friend of mine organized an exhibition of Still's pictures in which significant "flakes" of paint gathered on the floor beneath each picture, leaving quite different colors to show through from behind. He called Still to apologize and ask what to do. According to him, the sometimes difficult, often devlish Mr. Still did not consider it a problem. Still said something to the effect that flaking was part of the intended process. (So who invented process art?) I doubt that Stills are allowed to "shed" these days.

Hans Hofmann's work also requires a lot of restoring, according to one collector I met who owns some of them. This time because of the thickness of the oil and probably a disregard for fat-over-lean in some instances.

If the world likes the art enough it will do what it must to make it last as long as possible. The most challenging problem to many of the paintings of the past 70 years is the technique of staining directly into the canvas, whether with oil or acrylic. Canvas is the most fugitive of all the supports and generally can be counted upon to rot no matter what in 200 or so years. "Relining" as we now know it (transfering the entire painting to a new canvas) does not appear to be a possiblity for pictures which include staining. That's many artists too, not just Louis, Pollock, and Frankenthaler.



December 26, 2004, 7:56 AM

I've heard of Pollocks flaking or leaving crumbs on the floor. Rothko famously said that he used whatever paint was on sale down at the hardware store, and they haven't flaked, but some of them have turned from fuscia to denim blue.



December 26, 2004, 9:18 AM


Thank you for the information... I did some more googling and the guy I was thinking of was Franz Kline.

"whatever paint was on sale down at the hardware store" was a breathtaking attitude for painters in the late 50s/early 60s. In today's world, if you're going to be a painter . . . hell, if you're going to be an artist of any sort, you have to be aware of how time (should you be so lucky) will treat your work. Damien Hirst has confronted this. Others ignore the issue conspicuously, which is, i think, a valid way to confront it.

I had an enlightening conversation on a related topic once with Duan Brant. His actual words are so faded to me now that I shouldn't even try to paraphrase him. But the gist I got from him was that an important part of being an artist is to have a particular attitude about your work.

I love pollock, kline, and hofmann for/despite their capriciousness re the stability of their work.

BUT those days are gone. Today, artists need to confront their work as something with the potential to be cherished for a long time. There are lots of ways to tackle this issue, but ignoring it is not one of them.



December 26, 2004, 9:40 AM


there is something beautiful about the deterioration of artworks. Much of Ana Mendita's work, and other art that is performance-based, can only be seen now through photographs (themselves fragile). Louis, Pollock, and Frankenthaler got to work in a time when they either didn't have to think about archival issues, or got to pretend they didn't care (the latter seems highly unlikely in the case of Frankenthaler).

Whatever--today it's different. If you make work today that's going to fade/fall apart/change in the next hundred years, people will be aware of the problems before they come to light (or not!!!).

I agree with catfish that "if the world likes the art enough it will do what it must to make it last as long as possible." But I think that in today's artworld, an artist who doesn't CARE about how his work will look in the future is an artist who may not be worth taking seriously.



December 26, 2004, 3:54 PM

From my observation I feel the art makers see it as one big free-for-all and buyer beware! Which puts the onus on the collectors to learn about more than what meets the eye...
It is only natural that it trickle down into art. Buyer beware is in all other areas from cars to drugs to everything...
the internet at least gives people half a chance to educate themselves and they don't have to rely totally on some disengenuous art dealer.....
so rolling in honey and birdseed can be a good thing...



December 26, 2004, 4:34 PM

But I think that in today's artworld, an artist who doesn't CARE about how his work will look in the future is an artist who may not be worth taking seriously.

Like it or not, if his work transforms into something markedly different from the original, you won't be able to see the object as the artist intended it - and thus you won't be able to take the object seriously in the same way as him.

I regard Still's remark as a cop-out retort typical of the man's prickliness, and I have never understood why artists who could make their work archival, like Still, didn't. DeKooning and Pollock would have benefitted from acrylic mediums and oil-impasto mediums, but didn't have them, so they did what they had to do. But Still could have simply used better paint. Rothko too, and he set up his work, which he based on nuanced transitions of hue, for the worst kind of disaster.

And I'm glad to have lived at a time when I could see Frankenthaler's earlier stain paintings in a state of good repair, because my future grandchildren will not.



December 26, 2004, 5:32 PM

Franklin: The existence of acrylic paints that emulated the characteristics of Duco id not happen until Ed Harris made the movie Pollock. He and his crew did not want to be exposed to the hazards of oil, especially the solvents, so they asked Golden Paints if they could formulate water based acrylic that had the same characteristics. Golden succeeded as far as I could see in the movie.

But the problem of canvas rot remains for both acrylic and oil. Frankenthaler's later acrylic stain paintings will go God knows where when the canvas they are painted IN goes where all canvas goes. Frankenthaler's oil stained works - well we all know what oil does to canvas if the canvas is not protected by an adequate ground.

Morris Louis, on the other hand, used "spirit based" acrylic for his stain pictures. This material does not itself hasten the demise of canvas. But what happens to them when the canvas deteriorates? Maybe technology will find a way ...

One way to "preserve" the stain pictures might be to copy them.

The aesthetic problem all the stain painters faced and face is that there is no other practical way to get those effects on the scale they use than canvas.



December 26, 2004, 5:35 PM

A quote from Renoir applies: "Be a good craftsman; it won’t stop you being a genius."



December 26, 2004, 5:44 PM

Catfish: Golden has been making fluid acrylics for ages. Did they di something with viscosity or some other charactersitic for Haoris?



December 26, 2004, 5:45 PM

The aesthetic problem all the stain painters faced and face is that there is no other practical way to get those effects on the scale they use than canvas.

One easy solution exists if they can live without canvas's absorbancy - prime it, and make it possible to reline the painting in the future. (I know you know this, Catfish, I'm just saying for the benefit of anyone else.) Of course, the paint won't soak up in quite the same way, but one can still make stained effects on the surface.

Last night I was going through a Balthus catalogue that presented two drawings that had been executed in verso to one another - on a single sheet of paper that a conservator figured out how to bisect without damaging either drawing. Amazing.



December 26, 2004, 5:50 PM

Franklin said: Like it or not, if his work transforms into something markedly different from the original, you won't be able to see the object as the artist intended it - and thus you won't be able to take the object seriously in the same way as him.

This seems to be hard wired true. But then I think of the Sistine Chapel ceiling. Before it was cleaned, it was great, but sometimes used as an instance of "Michaelangelo was not that much of a colorist". Now its color is recognized as being as saturated as fresco of that time could have ever been. And it is still great. Did anything really change aesthetically when it was restored?



December 26, 2004, 6:06 PM

Oldpro: Golden's article about its work with Pollock.

Catfish: Did anything really change aesthetically when it was restored? Maybe not change, but the restoration removed the blinders of history. I studied in Rome when they were cleaning it, and I could compare the cleaned parts to the dirty parts. The cleaned parts matched his easel paintings better, and I didn't understand why certain people thought the restorers were ruining the ceiling. Later I found out art historians had been analyzing the significance of that brown muck for 400 years and had great attachments to it. They didn't want to hear that it came from incense smoke.

Because of the scaffolding they used for the cleaning, my teachers at the time were able to go up and touch the Sistine Ceiling. They tried to get us up there, but couldn't. I did get to touch the trumpet-blowing angel on top of the Trevi Fountain, though.



December 26, 2004, 6:08 PM

oldpro: Yes Golden has been making fluid acrylics for a long time. They are designed with "stainers" in mind and thus have as little surface tension as possible. You can add soap-like ingredients that destroy surface tension even more, so that they more readily soak into the canvas. (Many early acrylic stain painters actually did use soap which works quite well. Soap breaks the surface tension of water so it can penetrate those dirty clothes better.)

Harris's request for paint that worked like Duco during the airborn phase of application did indeed require special formulation, as the additional surface tension needed was in the opposite direction of their normal product. Golden wrote about it in one of their Just Paint issues.

Franklin: Conservators I've talked with are quite concerned about acrylic gesso. They say it sticks too well to canvas. Unlike hide glues which are forever dissolvable in water, acrylic once dried is imprevious to most solvents and any strong enough to break its bond are so destructive as to be a hazard to the paint film itself. One said they will probably need to dissolve the canvas with something, but that "something" remains an unknown.

Golden markets a gesso (acrylic, of course) that emulates the characteristics of paper. The surface it creates is somewhat fragile, but both oil and acrylic spread and soak into it in a manner similar to the way they work on paper.



December 26, 2004, 6:19 PM

Franklin wrote: art historians had been analyzing the significance of that brown muck for 400 years and had great attachments to it.

Funny how a discipline that supposedly attaches itself to facts does not practice even the most fundamental self-criticism.

Thanks for URL to the Golden article. Their technical department is without peer as far as I know.



December 27, 2004, 1:03 AM

Franklin & catfish - thanks for the info

Franklin the effects of staning into raw canvas and staining on sized canvas are completely different. I still remember years ago when I didn;t know better trying to "stain" sized canvas and being perplexed by the unsoaked-in watercolorish residue I got.



December 27, 2004, 3:59 AM

I have to agree with OldPro about the lack of staining ability on primed canvas. Staining only works on a surface that can be soaked into.
It is an inherent problem in the method. Does that mean artists shouldn't stain because of that? I don't knot the answer to that if archivability is the criteria for an artworks seriousness.

Franklin, the fact that your grandchildren won't see the same Frankenthaler that you see is indeed the crux isn't it?

But then what about Kiefer and Tapies? Did anyone see theTapies at Art Basel? We are back to adhesives again. I loved the piece, its sparcity on that large black field, but when that fabric gives way where is the painting?

And we also know that an owner of a Schabel plate painting hopes one of the plates drops off during a dinner party, that makes it a really successful and memorable dinner party....

But what if that plate is the one the eye or nose of the figure is painted on. We then have a painting of a cyclops. Is that what the artist intended? Yet he must know that eventually the plates will fall.

After doing mix media for over 30 years I pretty much know if it isn't bolted on it probably won't stay on. JB Weld is the closest to a permanent bond but even that can harden and slick off especially in cold temps. So I pretty much stopped using much of anything that couldn't be bolted on. Did that sacrifice my art? my vision? Did I compromise my grand palette of a universe of objects. Perhaps but I made that a part of my process too. It had to be able to hold a bolt. Personally I feel it my obligation as an artist to my collectors who are paying good money, certainly more than I can afford to pay for a work of art, that when their kids inherit it, it won't be in pieces. Buyt that realization came over many years, and some very embarrasing phone calls...



December 27, 2004, 4:15 AM

What the artist "should" deliver is good art. I suppose that, if everything else is equal, doing it technically well is a plus. But first things first.



December 27, 2004, 4:20 AM

Amen to that. But of course inspiration comes before technique...



December 27, 2004, 4:34 PM

I think inspiration and technique work together, Bookworm. They are inextricable. As for having to use bolts as a tecnique, your inspiration will find a way to make the bolts a plus rather than a problem. The only thing you sacrifice are some of your original intentions and ideas, which should always be modified as the art is being made anyway.



December 27, 2004, 7:09 PM

Personally I like the challenge of making my inspiration work on all levels, including technically, but perhaps I have more patience than some...
Thanks for all your input... it is gratifying... now enuf of my concerns.



December 27, 2004, 7:50 PM

The european political work is at MAC, not MAM. I only point this out so that you perhaps disassociate some of your venom from MAM. I hope one day that you will appreciate the institution.

I think that MAC's fellowship program is quite intriguing. Concerning the artist benefitting from the program, I am dissapointed as usual that non-Miamians think only of Miami Beach. I would recommend to Mr. Saraceno to get a bike; he is not very far from either South Miami, UM, or the Metrorail if the MAC Fellowship program is in the apartments adjacent to the gallery itself, as it was intended to be . . . .

In Alfredo's article, he did not, apparently, have the chance to give more detailed info about the fascinating history of Lummus Park. Here is a quote from the invite:

**Lummus Park is the City of Miami's oldest park. It was created in 1909 from dry hammock land next to the Miami River. Before the construction of I-95 carved it up, Lummus Park was a very active and dynamic park. In the sixties, its shuffle-board club had over 600 members. Recently the area has been designated an historic district and Lummus Park is surrounded by a wide variety of interesting buildings including the unique Scottish Rite Temple built by the famed architectural firm of Kiehnel and Eliot. Withing the park are two historic structures: The William English Plantation Slave House c. 1844 and the Wagner homestead c 1857. The preserved Slave House is the only testament to Miami's two decades of plantation enslavement of Africans. The Wagner home is the oldest surviving home in the county and its history tells of a German, William Wagner, who in 1855 came to the remote pioneer community so he could live openly with his black wife, Eveline.



December 28, 2004, 1:29 AM

Thanks, Kathleen. Those details should be right.

I don't recall expressing much venom about MAM itself, mostly just the shows they have had.



Other Projects


Design and content ©2003-2022 Franklin Einspruch except where otherwise noted