Previous: artblog.net named best local website by new times (29)
ticking it off
Post #538 • May 13, 2005, 10:49 AM • 104 Comments
First of all, thanks for the congratulations. Without my spirited commentators and devoted readers, this site would consist of me ranting fruitlessly into the digital aether. Thank you.
Item next, the company alluded to here is here. Drawing Project was too limited in scope to encompass everything I want to do, and it had no business using a .org extension. Drawww will pick up the intentions of DP and expand on them. Actually, the tagline almost read, "Trying to turn one man's polymathy into something resembling gainful employment." Its first project is Go See Art, with more to follow. I'm going to make Artblog.net a project of Drawww retroactively. You get the idea. Big thanks to DRL for help with incorporation.
Item next, I'm working up two articles for Accent Miami, longer pieces between one and three thousand words. The first will interview Suzanne Delehanty; the second will review the Rubell show this weekend and discuss the New World - Snitzer - Rubell phenomenon. Please suggest questions for the former and raise points you want to see addressed in the latter.
Item last, it's Friday, so let's round it up. We got Art & Culture Center tonight; Saturday, chez Rubell, Carol Jazzar's deal at Octopus, and the stunnning Maria Jose Arjona doing her thing at Damien B. Anything else?
2.
May 13, 2005, 6:04 PM
Dorsch will be open this Saturday 7-10 PM for those who may wish to see or revisit the excellent AIM (Abstraction in Miami) show previously discussed here.
3.
May 13, 2005, 6:08 PM
What Rubell show is this, Franklin? A show of what?
4.
May 13, 2005, 6:17 PM
These people really need a website...
AT THIS TIME, 10 Miami artists
14 May - 30 October 2005
Opening reception Saturday, May 14, 6 - 10 pm
Performances by Pablo Cano “Animated Alterpieces” at 8 PM
and “The Pursuit of Love” at 9 PM to be held
In conjunction with the opening reception
RUBELL FAMILY COLLECTION
95 NW 29th Street
Opening on the 14th of May is a major exhibition entitled: "AT THIS TIME, 10
Miami Artists." This exhibition will bring together many of the most important
artists working in Miami today including Hernan Bas, Jose Bedia, Pablo Cano,
COOPER, Naomi Fisher, Mark Handforth, Jiae Hwang, Cristina Lei Rodriguez,
Norberto Rodriguez, and Purvis Young. Curated by Mark Coetzee, the Rubell
Family Collection Director, this exhibition will encompass ten galleries, the
most space ever dedicated to a single exhibition. The exhibit will demonstrate
the connections and similar concerns of artists who call Miami home. It has
been a considerable period of time since any museum in Miami has exhibited a
significant overview of area artists so this show will be an important time for
us to evaluate what artists have been doing in Miami over the last number of
years. "AT THIS TIME, 10 Miami Artists" involves a spectrum of art forms that
includes sculpture, painting, video, drawing, installation, photography,
performance and conceptual interventions.
5.
May 13, 2005, 6:56 PM
Thanks, Franklin.
As for suggestions on what to ask or bring up with Delehanty and your Snitzer-New World-Rubell piece, I'm sure you can figure out the relevant topics on your own. Anybody reasonably tuned in to the local art scene, as you surely are, knows very well what the issues are and have been. You certainly know what MY issues are. Unfortunately, both MAM and Snitzer can dance or spin around you easily enough, since you have no substantial leverage to deploy, and they do. Still, it should make for interesting reading, though I expect it'll be rather like interviewing politicians.
6.
May 13, 2005, 7:35 PM
Because I told her she couldn't post her press release last night, here's Carol Jazzar's website.
7.
May 13, 2005, 9:46 PM
FYI:
The curator for the Hollywood All-Media Juried Biennial, opening tonight, was Nick Cindric of Rocket Projects.
8.
May 14, 2005, 12:38 AM
You can ask Snitzer why he chooses to promote the same contrived conceptual garbage instead of giving artists with soul and sincerity a chance to further their careers.
There is obviously talent at the Snitzer Galleryunfortunately its olso obvious the dominant factor is Hype. You can ask him why he lies to prospective buyers/collectors by telling them this is the best shit around.
9.
May 14, 2005, 1:07 AM
MFA Group show at UM's Lowe Museum. Featuring Photo: Mark Koven, Sarah Preston, Graphics: Jenn Wood, and Debbi Keates, Painting: Lucas Blanco, Andy Gambrell, Phillip Spence, Will Carpenter, Printmaking: Layla Copeland, April Compare
its from 8-10pm
10.
May 14, 2005, 1:12 AM
oh, and Ceramics: Mike Douglas and Wes somebody from part time photo student fame. Any body who knows him please post his last name. Thanks
11.
May 14, 2005, 1:30 AM
Wes Carson
12.
May 14, 2005, 2:15 AM
oh yeah. thanks
13.
May 14, 2005, 10:54 AM
- and we always thought that the name was 'COOLper'?
14.
May 14, 2005, 3:41 PM
about the 10 artist extravaganza: when does the show close?
15.
May 14, 2005, 8:02 PM
There is such an awfully large amount of awful art in Miami, from what I've read on this blog, a recurring theme is Snitzer and the disdain for him in thel posts. I've just started reading the blog, so please forgive, after the New Times laurels and while I don't know the man personally, I do believe "his" artists are fresh and are generating interest in art from outsiders, which seems to be another observation and theme running on this blog: Go See Art. It's contradictory and spiteful. Why such hate for Hernan Bas? Jealousy perhaps, he does seem to have the entire package a modern day artist needs - you can see that notion personified if you've read that recent article in Ignore Magazine - a kind of well-rounded piece if sensational on a local artist, not just a flaky opinion. He is immature and a tad snobbish, so what, he's still incredibly young and talented (to deny that is absurd). Oh, he's not living in a squat or poor and doesn't have a scar on his face. Doubly Absurd. This blog seems to splurge with as much excess for power as Snitizer is so allegedly characterized by. It seems an artist like Bas cannot have his work separated from his connections, but he's opened more eyes to Miami's art scene and thus probably even views on this blog and there is little appreciation. The Snitzer-bashing is cliche and loathsome. Boring and ironically uncreative. Disappointing. It should be about the art, that's it. Perhaps Artpoliiticsblog is more suitable. Best of luck with the upcoming articles.
.
16.
May 14, 2005, 9:13 PM
Ms. Fogleman, allow me to clean you up a little.
I don't claim to speak for my commenters, but if you're discussing my words, that I can respond to. As I've noted before, there's a contingent out there that wants things to be simpler than they are: if I don't love Bas's or Snitzer's product, I must hate them. I hope you don't subscribe to this simplistic viewpoint. Most what I've said about about them, lately, has either been criticism, which we're all fair targets for, or humor at their expense, which everybody's just going to have to deal with. Hate? A rare occurence in my psyche, and one reserved for much worthier targets.
...he does seem to have the entire package a modern day artist needs...
It should be about the art, as you say at the end. The flip side of success by other means (such as the fact that Bas takes a good head shot; he notes as much in the Ignore article) is me coming out and saying that the rest of the package only matters to the eyeless and the gullible. It's a business transaction and can be admired as such, but it cannot by admired as art.
He is immature and a tad snobbish, so what, he's still incredibly young and talented (to deny that is absurd).
Youth is an accident of history and nothing to be proud of. He is not incredibly talented. He is adequately talented. I mean that in a positive way - his talents allow him to do what he does. I suspect that he doesn't paint large because he hasn't figured out how to pull it off yet and he uses color with strain, but his style matches his concept, which counts for something.
It seems an artist like Bas cannot have his work separated from his connections, but he's opened more eyes to Miami's art scene and thus probably even views on this blog and there is little appreciation.
He sent some page views my way? Whoop dee do. And I can every easily separate his work from his connections. His connections are amazing. His work is okay.
The Snitzer-bashing is cliche and loathsome.
Snitzer hosts an uneven array of products down at the gallery. Some of it is quite good; I especially like Jacin Giordano's and Gavin Perry's work. Bas has his moments, as does Luis Gispert and several others down there. But a lot of it refuses to leave the bonds of earth - it's utter twaddle; but the man can move it. So it comes to pass that the Rubell's put on a show and their press release says:
The exhibit will demonstrate the connections and similar concerns of artists who call Miami home. It has been a considerable period of time since any museum in Miami has exhibited a significant overview of area artists so this show will be an important time for us to evaluate what artists have been doing in Miami over the last number of years.
And of this "overview" of ten Miami artists, six of them happen to belong to Snitzer's stable. As a friend of mine put it, that's not an overview, it's an oversight. People owe it to themselves, as a matter of intellectual self-defense, to recognize this as bullshit and treat the involved parties accordingly.
17.
May 14, 2005, 10:06 PM
This overview was curated by curated by Mark Coetzee, not Snitzer, and is representative of works owned by the Rubells. Blame them if you are not in the show.
18.
May 14, 2005, 10:20 PM
The above press release came from Snitzer Gallery. I can see why they'd want to help publicize this thing.
19.
May 14, 2005, 11:47 PM
Envy is bitter... avoid it if you can.
20.
May 15, 2005, 12:16 AM
Face it, Franklin, some people will always dismiss criticism with the most expedient means at hand, however simplistic. If you criticize Bas, it must be envy, or at least homophobia. If you criticize Naomi Fisher, it must be sexism. If you criticize Purvis Young, you must be a racist. And so on and so forth. It's a rather primitive and crude defense mechanism, but as long as it makes the defensive party feel vindicated and off the hook, it's likely to be utilized. As you must admit, it's quick (as in knee-jerk) and extremely handy--just accuse the critic of ulterior and dishonorable motives and move on to the next press release.
21.
May 15, 2005, 12:56 AM
Right, Jack, and if you haven't seen the maneuver before, you start trying to defend yourself against envy or homophobia or what have you. But since I have, I'll instead ask Coctaiu (?) to point out where I stated incorrect facts or unreasonable judgments. Typically his ilk wither and slink off when asked to do that kind of heavy lifting.
22.
May 15, 2005, 1:18 AM
This has been one of the more perplexing discussions here lately.
Since I don't live in Miami I lack a clear overview of the art establishment in your fair city. Although I know my observation is incorrect, it often appears as if there are only two galleries that anyone here is paying attention to, Dorsch and Snitzer. I find the apparent rivalry and polarization of opinions humorous.
I know nothing of Hernan Bas but his paintings appear to be quite strong for someone so young. Ah, the promise of youth, full of hope and awkwardness. I’m not sure I would bring up the issue of scale as a critical point.
i
23.
May 15, 2005, 1:29 AM
The scale issue isn't a deal-killer. I just feel a little suspicious about it. It does seem like a limitation on the work as a whole but doesn't defeat any individual one.
If anyone would like to see it, I have written about Snitzer before in print. I think you'll find my opinion mixed but slanted positively.
24.
May 15, 2005, 1:34 AM
There is some accuracy in your observations about Bas, Alyssa, that is, I think some of the bad comments directed his way may be impelled in part by resentment, and maybe the same holds for Snitzer. I have nothing against either, but it is plain to my eye that Bas is a very modestly gifted artist who has hit a mainstream "look" and that Snitzer is a dealer who has no eye that I can discern and capitalizes on fashion. Neither is a bad thing, as such, but it is human nature to carp a bit when you know there is better art out there, especially if you love art. Give the complainers some credit for caring.
It has always been this way. As kid artists back in the 50s we used to bitch and moan because all the NY collectors were buying insipid School of Paris artists instead of our AE heros. What's good is good and it will get there. Bas and Snitzer are of their time. They will pass.
25.
May 15, 2005, 1:59 AM
An artist who is envious of Snitzer's stable is seriously misguided. Oldpro is right the only thing that haunts the real artists in this town are artists who are better then he or she. Snitzer's artists don't threaten anyone because they are mostly second rate 3rd generation trend pop. That Snitzer could sell a ketchup popsicle to a woman in a white dress on a 100 degree Miami morning is another story and has nothing to do with art.
26.
May 15, 2005, 3:40 AM
das tru that guy sure is a good salesman
27.
May 15, 2005, 5:30 AM
From an artist's perspective, what is happening on the local Miami scene isn't much different than anywhere else. There is a Snitzer or two or three in every major city. And there are a few artblog.nets here and there too.
The debate about "motive" really isn't interesting. Allegedly, Snitzer is a money loving glory hog and artblog.net is populated by envious retrogrades. These are oh so typical results when each side plays pin the tail on the donkey with the other. Who can know such things about the inner motives of our fellow human beings anyway?
What is really hard for many of us is to continue with our art when we simply cannot respect the stuff that is getting most of the attention. Whatever our emotional state might be, it isn't envy. Nor idoes not doing that which we don't respect qualify as despair. It does require a pretty accommodating day job, though, to reconcile the needs of daily life with the ambitions of serious art in an enviroment like this.
28.
May 15, 2005, 6:09 AM
Mad props to that ketchup popsicle line. I'm still giggling.
29.
May 15, 2005, 8:14 AM
I think this thread is sooooooo sad. . by criticizinG people on a destructive way doesn't help the art comunity, (neither creates "awareness")
It's just plain envy. why DONT' we start critizicing dorsch's gallery OR YOU GUYS ARE ALL FROM THE STAFF?.
About snitzer of being only "of the moment" WELL HE HAS BEEN around for almost 30 years. working with guys like bedia, cruz azaceta, bas, gispert (THIRD RATE ARTIST ACCORDING TO YOU: FIRST RATE CRITICS) . His function as a dealer is achieved. he helps the artists, by taking care of them and creating the right context to further their explorations. PERIOD. And the guys sells. THAT'S GREAT, is his job. Is THAT BAD?.
Attacking Hernan Bas is just so obvious and boring. the guy is talented. admit it. His work has touched many people. AND SOME WITH GREAT UNDERSTANDING OF PAINTING (NANCY SPECTOR for example). His treatment of the figure is honest, intelligent, compelling. AND consistent.
And FRANKLIN, please get over those suspicions about the size, size does not matter, Look a t vermeer dear, and if you insist in suspecting something, well, look at your own work AND , figure how to figure the figure in a large scale because your work is also great in a small format, but not in a large scale. and if you stop killing time with resentment and bitternes maybe you could focus some of that energy in improving that size limitation that you have.)
AND PLEASE, STOP DEFINING WHAT ART IS: "ART IS THIS, OR IS VALID AS LONG AS."...YOU ARE KILLING IT! and if you cannot resist, well consider going: for me, art is this, don't ever go: art is this, or art is that, it sounds so simple!. and you don't want to be a 3rd rate critic, don't you dear?
LOCUST? well that's something.....BEING UNFAIR WITH A NON PROFIT that brings work from first class artists from out of town (HOW MANY NON PROFITS DO THAT?), and conceives and creates bridges of interaction with great talents, curators etc, to benefit everybody. RESPECT SISTERS!!!!!!! WE ARE HERE TO HELP EACH OTHER.
Love.
w.
30.
May 15, 2005, 10:41 AM
My Godpeople are completely missing the point on this Snitzer rapYeah hes fucking GREAT at what HE doesHES a GREAT SALESMAN!!!...Mr. Bas, is TALENEDno one is saying hes not. I think the point is , which was more eloquently elaborated upon earlier is that there is MORE HYPE THAN GREAT WORK AT the SNITZER galleryand what youre reading IS NOT ENVYconfusion, maybecome-on admit it,. There are other MORE TALENTED ARTISTS that deserve the profit and recognition, some; as oldpro put it...more adequately talented artists are getting
It is confusing, especially to people making art, come on, we all go to opening nshit , youre going to tell me half that shit you see deserves the credit it gets. It doesnt, thats why most people dont understand art galleries or art in general or why people sound bitter or envious. Its confusing, some guy thats been around 30 years (so that means he knows what a good investment is) tells someone with money to burn what to buy and that makes it good? Bas is a good guy let him enjoy his success, thats fine. But dont tell me hes the BEST IN MIAMI or that the man that represents him is the authority on art.
And as for this great understanding of painting cutting out magazine photos and projecting them on a surface, hardly makes for ground breaking work.
In any case what is good about these retarded conversations are the hopes that people stop talking so much shit and start making art. And even if youre not talking it you know your thinking it.
Love,
Penis
31.
May 15, 2005, 2:38 PM
Babe, you are responding to criticism you don't like with comments directed at the critic. The repeated use of this strategy here on Artblog.net necessitated the creation of the "Address the writing, not the writer" item of the guidelines, which I hope you have read and understood.
George, Degas once said that everyone has talent when they're 25; the trick is to have it when you're 50. Bas's work has improved noticiably since two years ago, so I think we'll be seeing it around for a while. Although flawed, his work stood out among the Ten at the show mentioned above. I'll write a brief review sometime this week.
Janet, I think the conversations help people to form their own opinions about what's going on, and that makes them better, stronger participants in the art world whether they make art or not. I try to lead by example, expressing my opinions as fearlessly, reasonably, and clearly as I can. It doesn't matter much whether people agree with me - it matters that more courage, reason, and clarity come into the art world, expressed on behalf of any viewpoint.
Oldpro, we are all of our time, aren't we? I know what you mean and agree with you, but I note our puniness as we reach out to eternity. I wonder how we know whether what we do relates to the timeless, except by intuition.
32.
May 15, 2005, 4:40 PM
What we are seeing is knee-jerk reactions from first-time visitors who just picked up the New Times. The ones that stick around will no doubt end up with a more balanced view of what this blog is all about, but this thread has been entertaining. Too bad oldpro doesn't have the time/desire to mix it up with the same enthusiasm he used to.
It might be a small distinction, but I don't think Fred Snitzer's talent is salesmanship. I think his talent lies in picking artists he knows the big-money (and medium-money) collectors will be interested in, and maybe creating buzz. I honestly don't think you "sell" a Hernan Bas in the same sense that we talk about selling a car.
Speaking of Hernan Bas, I think his popularity stems from an almost intangible fragileness in his work. I think the painters on this blog respect heroic, old-school capital-G capital-P Great Painting which is something pretty different. And by the way some of his new pieces seemed a good 30 x 40", which is pretty big in my book.
Franklin~ who responded to criticism with comments directed at the critic? It's not clear from your post who you're referring to, and I didn't notice anyone doing that...
33.
May 15, 2005, 4:45 PM
The remark everyone has talent when they're 25 is a reference to fertility:-) I suspect youthful talent isnt evenly distributed as it appears that Hernan Bas got more than his fair share. As Degas noted there are no guarantees and well see at 50.
As oldpro alluded, at any point in time, "the establishment" will often seem to support the "wrong" art. Ill leave it to the reader to form a personal definition for "wrong" art. Unfortunately, we will also find that the artists viewpoint can appear equally amiss when viewed within the context of current art fashion. Fashion? Oh no! In defense of fashion I would say that it is fashion which plucks artists from the common pool of obscurity and offers them a moment in the sun of visibility. This is not a bad thing, it is a helping hand to start a career in motion. At the same time we realize that fashion is both fickle and cyclical, whats "in" today is "out" tomorrow but as the wheel grinds through the generic taxonomy of tastes everyone usually gets a shot at the brass ring.
From my viewpoint, fashion is chance. Which ultimately matters is what the artist does with the opportunity.
Catfish made a remark worth repeating, What is really hard for many of us, is to continue with our art when we simply cannot respect the stuff that is getting most of the attention. This is a sensitive admission which might be right at the core of the current discussion. For the most part the life of a creative person is a lonely pursuit. At great emotional risk, we lay bare our souls to effect an expression about an aspect of our worldview. The sense of being outside of the accepted, forces us to call upon all our energies of self belief and conviction. Conversely, public success can infuse us with stupendous confidence and energy and success brings its own risks.
In spite of the polarization, this group does serve an admirable function by promoting a dialog among the participants which can help alleviate the issue mentioned by catfish. Of course, this is only true when the comments are specific and not just a blanket declaration of personal taste.
34.
May 15, 2005, 4:45 PM
Franklin writes "I wonder how we know whether what we do relates to the timeless, except by intuition."
We don't. We just have to keep on working and hope for the best.
But sometimes it is easier to see what is purely transitory, especially when you have seen as much "sic transit gloria mundi" as I have.
35.
May 15, 2005, 5:16 PM
Here, some people "giggle" at stuff that violates this blog's guidelines.
36.
May 15, 2005, 5:28 PM
I think the pro-Bas pro-Snitzer crowd could use a better class of defenders. This page is becoming a gutter.
37.
May 15, 2005, 5:29 PM
But maybe a little less of one after Franklin extracted the last beauty.
38.
May 15, 2005, 5:31 PM
That ketchup popsicle image made me laugh. You making any progress on my request in #21, Coctaiu?
Yeah, Oldpro, at a certain point I get tired of the genital references and raw trash-talking. Reason, people, reason! I know we're talking about Miami, but still...
39.
May 15, 2005, 5:35 PM
Why did you leave the 'penis' one up then?
40.
May 15, 2005, 5:35 PM
yeah, this webpage smells like censorship, maybe we could use better critics. with a capital (C). It's obvious for everybody that this kind of stuff responds only to serve the egos of the artists that promote it. and they feel they can delete whatever enters the club and doesn't please them. Luckily for you, Hernan Bas or Snitzer and co. are too bussy to start a blog on their own and become self-serving advocates.
41.
May 15, 2005, 5:39 PM
to WHY: he left the penis one because is self serving babe, read it again.
42.
May 15, 2005, 5:46 PM
to mark: I know.
43.
May 15, 2005, 5:52 PM
Usually, if you want to expand an audience you lower the standards.
This instance, though, was a case of well deserved publicity for artblog.net that effected an expanded audience as a consequence. They, in turn, have lowered the standards of expression to their level.
Fame, even when limited to a small region such as Miami, has its downside. Guess we'll just have to become accustomed to the new style of commentary, for a while, anyway. It will pass, probably.
Guess this is another lesson in be careful what you ask for.
44.
May 15, 2005, 5:59 PM
Franklin is doing his best to run a blog where people talk about art, the art world and ideas about art. He and some of the rest of us have a strong, clear minority point of view which we know is not going to make the mainstream people happy.
Opposition is welcomed and encouraged; that is on the record. We like to listen, consider, disagree and argue.
Garbage is not welcomed and encouraged. If you have something to say, say it. if you want to talk trash, go find another blog.
45.
May 15, 2005, 6:01 PM
The Catfish has a good point.
46.
May 15, 2005, 6:03 PM
to catfish:
i think the standards where actually low already, very much indeed. And what do you consider a decent level of discussion? attacking some guys? and if someone deffends them what? is that low? why? because it contradicts the sacred triad of CRITICS (WITH A CAPITAL C) OF THE CLUB?
MAYBE THAT'S LOWERING THE STANDARDS. IN THE PAST THEY USED TO CALL IT DISAGREEING.
47.
May 15, 2005, 6:06 PM
I don't feel great about the penis one, either, but at least it tried to make some points. In comparison to Mark's deleted post, it read like Shakespeare. Again, I have no problem with disagreement - you'll notice that Wild Babe (that's who that guidelines remider was directed to, Alesh) and Alyssa made comments that remain above.
Mark, I don't owe you a forum. You did nothing to create this site and do nothing to maintain it. So criticise me if you want to, but your posts appear here at my discretion. Go have a look at the guidelines for more guidance.
Catfish, other bloggers have noted that comments moderation must increase with reader traffic in order to maintain a good read. That results in the systems that Slashdot and Daily Kos use (registration and ratings) or Andrew Sullivan's (no comments; you want to say something, e-mail me, maybe I'll post it and respond). Now you see why - the lumpen horde, in this case producing defenders of Bas. (Can we call them Bas Boys?)
48.
May 15, 2005, 6:11 PM
well Franklin, don't even try to present this website as an objective forum. I t's a forum where your vision is encouraged, and others criticized. Lovely.
+ plus. i'd rather be called the einspruch boy. I admire your work by the way. (as a painter) so go back to it, because it will make a difference.
49.
May 15, 2005, 6:14 PM
and Franklin thanks for the Shakespeare thing. some posts here sound like..... well the word eludes me.
50.
May 15, 2005, 6:16 PM
I have never represented Artblog.net as an objective forum. In this forum I express my opinions and other people respond. Thank you for the compliments on my painting.
51.
May 15, 2005, 6:20 PM
franklin you are welcome, and i didn't know you didn't presented artblog as objective. I;mm soory man, i just think that the posts of some people are so unfair. And i do understand their bitternes, sometimes curators and collector follow some stuff that doesn't deserve half the compliments they get, but, on the other hand, attacking people's work it just doesn't create awareness or the carrot revolution. what we need is thinkers, no complainers and some REAL LEVEL of discussion.
52.
May 15, 2005, 6:43 PM
Mark,
Discussing standards as they might apply to standards seems treacherous to me. Besides, I've said about all I have to say. Better to stop here before I inadvertantly rip off some other poster's remark or declare some legitimate English word to be a typo (mistakes I've made recently).
I'd just ask that you not always consider "attacking" someone's art to be an attack on that someone. Nor is "defending" someone's art defending them.
53.
May 15, 2005, 6:46 PM
so, did anyone see anything worth discussing yesterday?
54.
May 15, 2005, 7:56 PM
Mark, if you want "real level" of discsssion try providing some. What you are doing now is more or less ranting.
And characterizing, eg calling the commentors here "bitter", is something we try to avoid for the sake of keeping away from name-calling and personal invective. You may not like it, but as Franklin says, it's his blog, and he makes the rules.
55.
May 15, 2005, 9:08 PM
A few posts ago, it was the "lucrative New World/Snitzer/Locust clique", and now it is the "New World - Snitzer - Rubell phenomenon". I suppose that the third part of the slash-hyphen relationship is the variable, and the reviled constants are New World and Snitzer.
Franklin and readers have made clear why they are critical of Snitzer, but I have to remark that the obsessive focus on Snitzer really goes beyond criticism and seems to be more of a one-sided feud.
Though the Rubell's collection seems like an institution, it is still a private collection, and as such should not be taken as any indicator of relative merit on the part of the artists in the collection. Perhaps local discontents should instead look at the collections of local museums to determine whose work is or is not getting attention. One will find that the selection of local artists in permanent collections is more diverse in its scope and gallery relationships than artblog and its readers attentions would belie.
Similarly, the assumption that the so-called New World/Snitzer/Locust connection is lucrative is somewhat absurd. It seems too obvious to point out, but you're giving too much credit to Snitzer and not enough to the artist and his/her work. Because if it were simply Snitzer, then every show at Snitzer would be sold out, and that is not the case. If it were simply New World, every New World graduate would have a waiting list. If it were as easy to tabulate as New World plus Snitzer plus Locust equals lucrative success, then your habitual target, Hernan Bas, would put the lie to the equation, as he has not exhibited at Locust. I suspect that the word lucrative is being conflated with attention around these parts.
I know that many artblog devotees do not appreciate the work of the artists represented by Snitzer, but to consistently blame "hype" for the results of talent is pretty shabby. If the oversighted art which you love is truly deserving, then why spend so much time and vitriol on New World, Snitzer, Locust and the Rubells? Create more opportunities for yourselves to praise shows and works instead.
A final note on the level of animosity abounding: what has been passing for "humor" and criticism around here would never be appropriate in person. There has been demonstrated a general dearth of respect for the artists and others who happen to be associated with either of your identified triads, and though you (plural) may proclaim that the attacks are only on the artwork, not the artists, recent remarks concerning the bang bus, people's personal lives, "money loving glory hog", etc. show otherwise.
56.
May 15, 2005, 9:26 PM
geez kathleen might be right. give this miami art stuff time ,,, all this stuff is new, there should be room for eveyone ,, so keep making art
57.
May 15, 2005, 11:12 PM
Kathleen, you are making a pretty massive generalization.
You have characterized the last couple of days as some kind of one-sided hatchet job by the regulars at Art Blog. This is not quite accurate. Read it over and see. Some commentors have tossed some barbs at Bas/Snitzer and a lot of other commentors have tossed them back. I have little interest in Bas or Snitzer but apparently a lot of folks do, and it has been a give-and-take situation with a little trash talk around the edges, that's all. It went where it wanted to, as a blog should.
Frankly, with all due respect, I would rather see people throwing comments and criticism around in a free-for-all that more-or-less conforms to Franklin's very broad and sensible blog rules than read righteous lectures about our unruly behavior.
58.
May 15, 2005, 11:14 PM
Ah, you see that, Basboys? Intelligent disagreement. We likey.
Though the Rubell's collection seems like an institution, it is still a private collection, and as such should not be taken as any indicator of relative merit on the part of the artists in the collection.
I agree. When press releases issuing out of the Rubells indicate otherwise, I feel obliged to point this out.
Perhaps local discontents should instead look at the collections of local museums to determine whose work is or is not getting attention. One will find that the selection of local artists in permanent collections is more diverse in its scope and gallery relationships than artblog and its readers attentions would belie.
Perhaps we should. "Figuratively Speaking includes works from MAM’s permanent collection and key loans from private collections in South Florida. ...artists represented include José Bedia, Francesco Clemente, Edouard Duval-Carrié, Eric Fischl, Naomi Fisher, Alfredo Jaar, Ana Mendieta, Wangechi Mutu, Irving Penn, Arnaldo Roche-Rabell, David Salle, Andres Serrano, and Lorna Simpson." Three local artists, two of whom hail from Snitzer.
...if it were simply Snitzer, then every show at Snitzer would be sold out, and that is not the case.
You can't create an automatic formula for success in the business world. Otherwise everyone would easily get rich. That doesn't mean that general strategies don't exist. Snitzer holds a position in the art world that gives him favorable access to New World graduates (he teaches there). He reps all three of the artists who run Locust. He has a deep-pocketed private collector base, including the most ostentatious - the Rubells. Lorie Mertes, MAM curator, sits on the board of Locust. Each of these institutions confers a different kid of credibility on his artists, and he knows this, because when the Rubells or MAM send out a press release about a show that includes them, he forwards it. I admire his business acumen. Truly. I would emulate it given a chance. I wonder at what point one might characterize it as uncompetitive.
...Hernan Bas, would put the lie to the equation, as he has not exhibited at Locust.
He doesn't have to. Did you see all that work of his at the Rubells? Snitzer can mix and match his sources of credibility as needed.
...to consistently blame "hype" for the results of talent is pretty shabby.
The talent doesn't account for all of the results. I've discussed Bas's talents above already (#16), where I mention a possible non-talent reason for his particular results. Again, he states this freely.
Create more opportunities for yourselves to praise shows and works instead.
Working on it. I noticed you didn't comment on that, though, unless you have a pseudonym I don't know about.
There has been demonstrated a general dearth of respect for the artists and others who happen to be associated with either of your identified triads, and though you (plural) may proclaim that the attacks are only on the artwork, not the artists, recent remarks concerning the bang bus, people's personal lives, "money loving glory hog", etc. show otherwise.
I, singular, want the parties concerned to have long lives and great happiness in them. I respect their art as art, when it earns it, and their business acumen as business acumen, to the extent that such things merit respect. I find it easy to riff puns on "Bas" and no comment on his person should be inferred from my doing so. I would ask you to consider to what degree the dearth of respect derives from the hype itself. People don't like being spun. I very much dislike it, and as it happens, I have a blog.
59.
May 16, 2005, 1:07 AM
oldpro is bitter. excuse me, better.
60.
May 16, 2005, 1:10 AM
and catfish too.
61.
May 16, 2005, 1:17 AM
That Snitzer is so much an issue with you begins to smell like a rotten factpick a different target. Repeated too much and for too long only makes it more obvious.
62.
May 16, 2005, 1:20 AM
ok, let's go with dorsch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
63.
May 16, 2005, 1:21 AM
you go first
and rotten? what?
64.
May 16, 2005, 1:28 AM
"what we need is thinkers, no complainers and some REAL LEVEL of discussion." - Mark, #51
Coctaiu, still waiting. (#21, #38)
65.
May 16, 2005, 2:20 AM
dudes:
knowing next to nothing about what's happening in miami, and nothing about snitzer or dorsch or bas or what have you, i find kathleen's comments to be pretty on the mark when it comes to what's been going on here.
i think everyone understands the frustration that comes from seeing a medicore talent attain success or whatever, but at the same time, i have to marvel at the irony of it all, given how much the artblog hatchet jobbers (please forgive my mangling of the language) trumpet their indifference to what they see as the bullshit of the miami art scene.
however, franklin, i find your posts and comments to be the most even-handed and considered, and i would like to congratulate you on appearing at least to not have your mind already made up about everything. i don't think it is merely obligation on your part as the owner or monitor of this blog to be so.
as for mark and coctaiu, even while i may find myself in agreement with some of the things you had to say, please give it a rest already. you ain't helping with childish one line shouts from the back of the classroom.
66.
May 16, 2005, 2:36 AM
There is an interesting attitude buzz going on here. Everyone has been yakking about Bas & Snitzer in their own way, some negative and some positive, a good old bitch and counterbitch blog session, but somehow there is this recurrent theme of righteous admonishment threading its way through, as if we are engaging in some sort of reprehensible activity.
We aren't. This is what people do on blogs. This is what they are for. The way to make a blog interesting when someone says something you don't like is to to disagree and counterargue, not complain about the motives and attitudes of the writer. "What you said is full of shit and here's why..." is way more interesting and stimulating to me than whining about the fact that I said it. I am getting the feeling that what people really don't like is strong opinion of any kind. Too bad.
67.
May 16, 2005, 3:10 AM
I think this sums it best (wow, this seems to have really snowballed after my last and first post): The Miami Art-Blog World is Vapid Like a Soap Opera.
That's playing on the name of the Bas article referenced above in Ignore. So far there seems to be: "New Times rookies," the clueless, the pioneers (namely Franklin and, ironically perhaps, oldpro), and, oohhhh, THE MAINSTREAM.
Snitzer has brought many people to Wynwood for their first time, to view art nonetheless. I'm sure Wynwood is already over in the eyes of many, as there is no genuine artist "martyr" for artblog to celebrate and champion in face of Snitzer's "sexy" roster. Franklin's speculative criticism that Bas cannot work with a large canvas is absurd, it's like criticizing someone who already labels himself a three-point shooter. Why doesn't someone just ask the guy, he's around town. Bas pokes (no pun, har mar superstar), fun at himself in his work and in articles that actually confront him about it (not blogs that go on and on like neverending credits rolling).
If Bas went around the city prancing about his success, I could see reasoning for putting his young head on a stick. But he is extremely open about his flaws (he cries over soap operas for chrissake, he admits to the role looks play in success) and is not an elitist by choice (perhaps molded into one, molded into a loner, because of blogs like this, where money is the sole object of evil.)
I'm sorry but if Bas is going to be considered Miami's top definitive artist of now via the city's only decently viable print news source, then Artblog will no longer be a haven for the peanut gallery, but needs to be representative of opinions of all gallery-lovers and the curious (the horror). Being listed in New Times has changed that, that's what happens when you're on every street-corner like crack.
Not to sound like a plant, but it does seem that Ignore is headed in a better direction. As a transplant from San Diego, where's the real art coverage in this city? New Times? Hardly. The Herald. I wouldn't know. Street? Sure.
I mean look at this: http://www.ignoremagazine.com/discourse/art/bayunga/index.html
That's thorough and nutricious. Not reprocessed opinions.
My last post -
See you out "there" - Alyssa.
68.
May 16, 2005, 4:53 AM
I am getting the feeling that what people really don't like is strong opinion of any kind.
Especially mixed or negative opinion. I haven't said anything all that negative about Bas's work, for instance (at least not lately). He has some good points, he has some bad ones. But apparently I'm asking for his head on a stick and hating and so on.
I see that Bas has sacred cow status among some of his supporters. The fact that their undies are knotting up makes me think that I'm getting something right.
I'm sorry but if Bas is going to be considered Miami's top definitive artist of now via the city's only decently viable print news source, then Artblog will no longer be a haven for the peanut gallery, but needs to be representative of opinions of all gallery-lovers and the curious (the horror).
Artblog.net will continue to represent the opinions of its author and welcome the peanuts to do what they will, within a few guidelines. Have fun over at Ignore, Alyssa. See you around.
69.
May 16, 2005, 5:26 AM
seriously, if everyone is so tired of the same tired old shit, then say something interesting> God bless snitzer and bas and dorsch and my mom and everyone else...say something good and stop crying, one way or the other.
and if you tell me to , i'll say my contribution is saying MOVE ON.
70.
May 16, 2005, 5:43 AM
i wish you people were talkin shit about me. : )
71.
May 16, 2005, 5:52 AM
That's funny, Lick. Good for you.
72.
May 16, 2005, 6:13 AM
lick: show us some work and we can bitch with the best of them, or at least speak interestingly and intelligibly about it. You (and any other artist in Miami) can upload stuff to Miamiart.us. If you suck... I delete you. Just register and create your album, its free and easy.
73.
May 16, 2005, 6:36 AM
if strong opinion means an opinion that doesn't change old pro, then you've won the big prize. congrats. what's frustrating, particularly with you, is that for all your hustle and bustle about opinions and arguements and so on and isn't this wonderful and isn't this what blogs are all about etc., you refuse to budge. yeah yeah, i know all about your right to your opinions and your right to be stubborn and wear blinders and all the rest, and for that again, congrats, but as i've mentioned before on this site, what's the point of the free interplay of ideas and opinions on blogs such as this when the participants really only want to prove they know more than everyone else or to bitch about how corrupt the art world is or how all theory is bullshit or how they alone have an inkling as to the point of art blah blah blah. frankly, it's getting really fucking dull.
74.
May 16, 2005, 6:55 AM
I won't budge, Craig? Budge from what? What is this opinion i won't budge from? Be specific, please.
75.
May 16, 2005, 8:00 AM
alyssa and wild babe are right. this is a damn soap opera. where's the substance? discussion is great and all, but what about the gallery walk this weekend? why are people automatically being called "Bas Boys"? ridiculous. Where is the ART?
76.
May 16, 2005, 8:10 AM
uhhh...
oh how coy. i would never presume to put words in your mouth, chum... i won't write out your opinions for you. but don't worry, it ain't just you. you mentioned yourself (44) how you have such strong opinions that the mainstream (whatever that means) just can't stomach. always the iconoclast, eh? well, having been checking out this blog for quite some time, i feel i have a very good idea of what those strong opinions are, and how, while i refuse to get into defining them for you (i think you could handle that on your own), i am aware of how little they're likely to change. just based on what you write, dude. about art, history what have you. it's no biggie, after all, i'm just noting my own opinion. it's what blogs are for, right?
77.
May 16, 2005, 8:11 AM
no daniel, you should be asking "where's the love?"
78.
May 16, 2005, 8:19 AM
I have a little art from Saturday night on my blog. I'm still not making a big stink about it, though, because design issues are keeping it from looking right in certain browsers.
The high point for me was Swamp Cabbage at Locust. Great traditional photography with an accompanying documentary video. Great technically and substantively.
79.
May 16, 2005, 8:32 AM
Craig, you have a habit of making angry, unsupportable statements which you cannot back up. You just did it again. Why not just take some clear, specific point of difference and argue it out directly? It would be more interesting for everyone, even yourself.
80.
May 16, 2005, 9:34 AM
Hmm. well. all of this is interesting. I wonder what anyone thinks of something I am kicking around in my head.. and perhaps this has already been commented on in this blog.. what affect has Art Basil in Miami had on the local art scene/artists? I can imagine that that sort of intense rush of big time art world activity would create anxiety..for Miami artists or artists in any city. It is like for that brief week in December the little pond becomes the Pacific..then when over back to the pond again. How can that not be jarring?
81.
May 16, 2005, 2:43 PM
Onesock, I had something to say about that, briefly. That issue deserves more investigation.
82.
May 16, 2005, 3:15 PM
I consider reading. Or, perhaps I suffer reading. I do enjoy loads are writing. A quantity of what I read and write is meaningless. But I speculate we do to reach out.
83.
May 16, 2005, 4:24 PM
Bas, a genius!
84.
May 16, 2005, 4:34 PM
the content, danial is the art biz... although it sounds like a bunch of artist that wish to be at snitzer, there is some truth to what the busniness of art is for. making money, and that fosters compation,and that has little to do with art making.compation makes great basketball players, not great art..
85.
May 16, 2005, 5:16 PM
Are you kidding, Cohen? Competition pushes art just as hard as it does basketball, and in much the same way.
86.
May 16, 2005, 6:06 PM
he has good a good ear...and strickly for american top forty radio
87.
May 16, 2005, 6:27 PM
Why does everybody care so much about what art the Rudebells collect, for that matter why does everybody care at all, what peolpe decide to spend their money on. Art, manure, cars, houses, all the same shit. If you guys want to change the art world than Get a job! Buy some Art! Get laid once & awhile. Stop Hating! Stop being so old. I HATE ART!!!!!
88.
May 16, 2005, 6:30 PM
old pro:
you're right, i do tend to make off the cuff rhetorical statements, i've forgotten to take my pills the last few days. but i agree with cohen. competition is what has lead to what many of us find frustrating in the art world: that is, a kind of one upmanship between artists that doesn't always make the art any more interesting or relevant to what's happening in the world.
89.
May 16, 2005, 6:31 PM
i also happen to agree with thomas.
90.
May 16, 2005, 6:38 PM
Well up to same old tricks
Well, to suggest question or at least format for question
This is a personal story
I have been here only about a year
i used to work near snitzer
i, doing my lunch hour gallery visits, went to visit snitzer
i just happened to come in, out of the summer sun, slightly dirty (i did handyman stuff) and saw who appered to be head honcho guy. I walked up to him and said, "you must be schnitzer". That did it. he refused my outstretched hand. i just scoped the gallery and said bye and left.
At other times, cleaner, drier-i approached him similarly (without the "ch") and this time got sized up-looked me up and down and then proceeded to ignore me as i eventually felt mocked and left.
Hes a snobster- and will only work you. But his humanness is animal.
the new world-
a bunch of kids- and in this modern cult of youth why not. I mean it is a high school. Sure with a college, but isn't it the high school that gets credit. Anyways, kids-not much more than that. I mean they are great just like every other tom dick and harry are great, but plus, they are kids. the allure of youth---The stuff is well, young.
and finally bas-yes-bas
another miami icon
yes icon
if who and what he is is not miami, then let me know.
i dont mean on the all inclusive level, i mean in the pop cliched level (remember i am an outsider so i have more perspective on this than locals)(yes i do)(you can, but you have to step outside)
i remember seeing those as side notes on notebooks.
I think i saw him on the design night, you know, the day after he was named the best artist in miami. I dont know cause i thought he was a lot uglier judging from a picture i saw in a miami nice rag mag. He looked akward but not plain ugly. Missing that fade mustache. anyhow i wanted to say congrats, but by the time i had decided it was him, i was gone.
I think i would have asked him for an autograph or something like that, but....
rubells-
yes, a couple of folks who like what they like. They also happen to like stretches. They are in no way complete, in the sense of an all around, sensible collection, encompassing art or even a niche in it, but they are capricious, and gutteral, and that at least conveys a sense of taste.
But as for that taste-well about the library-another personal story.
you know that they have this supposed amazing library-so much so that you have to apply, get background checked, and be examined and approved to get through the glass doors. You have to state your business and pay admission. Well i did all this with my research intent being bauhaus. Good choice i thought in a building of that design with furniture of that inspiration. I even included it in my application. Well, lo and behold-i went in and not one bauhaus book turned up. Not anyone other than klee and insky. and i had to pay for this. Anyhow, it seemed an obvious inconsistency and mentioned they fill some of the spaces on the shelves with some suggested resources. I was probably tagged as some sort if intellectual snob for even thinking i could suggest something to their highnesses-but maybe they will and they will call me back once they have the source material i was looking for, and will call me back and let me in free of charge for a few minutes. but i dont think so.
as for who they show, well, they do have a ware/house to pay for, so investements and selfdeclaration are important.
And finally as for the blog-congrats to you too-the blog that is, to all including myself who if not contribute directly, at least read. I dont like much of the regulars on this blog, or at least their anonymous selves, they are not focused and complain to much without making even idealistic solutions. That is making them, not suggesting. Although they do have their good moments, they are generally, tonally, snitzers.
But i lo(ve/athe) you still
jake
91.
May 16, 2005, 7:01 PM
Good stories, Jake. As I said before I know & care little about Snitzer but the hand-shaking story does him in for me. This kind of bad treatment iis how these guys intimidate the rich folks, not to mention the poor guys who do the actual work. I have seen it many times. Very bad character. Gives me the creeps.
As for our "regulars" being "tonal Snitzers", well, no, I hope not. If I thought of myself as a "tonal Snitzer" I would turn suicidal pretty quickly.
Craig, once again, maybe I wasn't clear. I was talking about competition in the sense of trying to make better art, not market competition. That is completely something else.
And Thomas, I know, art gets pretty tiresome sometimes. But one can have a job, be old, get laid and still deal with it.
92.
May 16, 2005, 7:38 PM
I enjoyed those stories too. I try to cut people slack about stuff like that, and try to remember that they might be dealing with illness or death in the family or something. Again, only the art matters, not the guy selling it, although if you have repeat experiences like the ones above it becomes difficult to keep them from coloring your thinking. For the record, I have no issue with Snitzer personally and wouldn't air my feelings here if I did. I'll evaluate his artists' work and his business practices willingly, but not his person. Life and health to him.
93.
May 16, 2005, 7:46 PM
I don't expect this will change much, if anything, but here goes.
If I dislike a gallery owner's taste or ideas, and I consistently find shows at her/his gallery uncongenial, meaning I don't get any significant gain from going there, what should I do? Should I keep visiting anyway, pestering the owner and satisfied customers or visitors there at the time, insisting that they're wrongheaded and must change their views so *I* can enjoy going there? Is that reasonable, or should I just visit galleries that work better for me? I can still say whatever I want about the offending owner and gallery in my own space and time, but why keep going there? What if we substitute "blog" for "gallery"?
There are various art blogs around. None of them has any obligation to cater to me or anyone else, unless the blog owner wants to do so, which is entirely his/her choice. I fully accept this, no matter how much I may dislike a particular blog. That's why I follow some art blogs and not others. I do not persist in visiting blogs that don't suit me, let alone make a nuisance of myself at such a blog as if it had to suit me. For similar reasons, if I visit someone's home and find the decor abominable, I do not lecture my host or the other inhabitants on how the place should really be overhauled for my future visits.
I am not telling anyone what they can and cannot do regarding this blog or any other, since I have no way to control that anyhow. It's just that it would seem from much of the foregoing commentary that there is rampant masochism afoot. As a recovering (though hardly cured) art masochist, who used to make himself go to practically everything as if it were a moral obligation, I know a bit about whereof I speak.
94.
May 16, 2005, 8:30 PM
Franklin, I believe that you are a pretty fair guy. We don't agree sometimes, but I don't feel that it is ever a problem. I've been very keen on all of your efforts toward positivism and construction; please do not construe my lack of comment on them as negativity.
I think you do a lot toward making space for work which you appreciate. You do deserve a lot of credit. In truth, I think that a lot of your commentors (spelled like "orator") actually hold you back, and tether artblog to the negativity.
You might consider that oftentimes when I make a comment, I am addressing you/artblog as an institution itself, in a way to address the totality of the forum-like aspect of this site. I always assume the best concerning you, individually, even when we disagree.
Now, Franklin, that was a very facile attempt to prove your point by using "Figuratively Speaking". Had you also included "Light and Atmosphere" or MoCA's permanent collection, you would not have been able do so. Similarly, you can drum up conspiracy linkages wherever you like in Miami, but you seem to be game for selective editing. What about New World/MoCA/Placemaker? What about ArtCenter//Ambrosino/Yale? What about IFAC/University of Miami/Dorsch? Miami is too small to take such seeming consipracies seriously. You can make any kind of linkage you like to support your point in this town. Eventually, they all connect.
Additionally, the whole "lucrative" issue is, as I have said, absurd. The Coral Gables galleries probably do consistently more volume than Wynwood galleries, head to head, yet you (plural) have not been heaping conspiracy complaints upon them, or bemoaning thier promotion of "substandard" art.
OP: I'm surprised to hear that you are not keen on "righteous lectures" and massive generalization. :) I do acknowledge that you personally have not been culpable concerning the rabid Snitzer attacks. I also know you like to mix it up, but I admit that I do not like getting into the fray. Thus the tone which has put you off.
95.
May 16, 2005, 8:35 PM
Oh, Jack!
I really like your thoughtful posts (the ranty ones are a bit over-the-top for my taste, and don't really feature your better traits, in my mind). The one above is very nice.
96.
May 16, 2005, 9:08 PM
Kathleen, I am guilty of righteous lectures myself but I try to keep them away from content and within the bounds of an ongoing attempt to keep the blog lively and moderately intelligent. Strong critical opinion is fine; whining incoherently about it is not. I don't think the Snitzer critics are "culpable" of anything; Jake's story, which I have no reason not to believe, casts Snitzer in a very bad light, in my opinion. Telling people what to look out for is a service.
It will be interesting to see where the blog goes, now that it has this commendation from New Times. We have already seen new commentors, some of who have not added much. We are also seeing a slight change in the nature of some of the comments; what used to be more of a free-for-all is now, by a kind of unconscious acknowledgement of the blog's "official" status, a lot more criticism of the nature of the comments rather than direct reaction to them, accompanied by suggestions that our "tone" might be raised somewhat. I hope this subsides. I don't want the blog to be "nice". I want it to be interesting. Franklin's rules are quite adequate for control purposes.
97.
May 16, 2005, 10:13 PM
Kathleen, thanks for the acknowlegment. I went with the one list I could get off of the site. I would enjoy analyzing the correlation between the museum's artists and the local galleries, or the same relationships among the artists they have shown. I don't have that data, but I disagree about the amount of divisersity we'd find. The museums need database-driven websites with an annotated (including provenance) catalogue of works and thorough exhibition histories; with that, we could run the numbers and sort.
And yes, eventually, they all connect, but I'm asking a different question - at one point do the connections become uncompetitive? We've tried to hash out questions of conflict of interest on this blog and never decided anything, but market domination has particular measures, I'll bet, and I'd like to apply them to Snitzer and some of the other relationships you mention. I think we'd learn a lot.
98.
May 17, 2005, 2:53 AM
i wasn't trying a defam or bad light type thing #90, i was just addressing the topic-questions for the upcoming interview, and thought that an anecdote would serve to frame a question. sorry if it seemed otherwise. but as the story shows...
99.
May 17, 2005, 4:32 AM
Jack, please keep coming to the shows that Lombardi has let Chris and I arrange as you might see something worth your interests and efforts.
100.
May 17, 2005, 6:16 AM
Jordan, I've enjoyed both of the group shows you and Chris Meesey have put together, despite their inevitable unevenness. I don't mind going out of my way for that sort of show, because there's no pretentiousness, no utterly predictable product, no predetermined expectations--it's just a bunch of young and largely unknown artists putting their stuff out there as best they can. In both instances, I've been pleasantly surprised by something, and surprise of any kind is hard to come by at the official venues. I think if people are serious about finding good work, they have to look for it wherever it may be found, not just where it's supposed to be found (which may or may not be the case).
101.
May 17, 2005, 12:44 PM
sincerely Jack, what would the profit Hillel say of my love for fellow humans and my need to recieve love from my fellow humans in this abyss of uncertainess?
102.
May 17, 2005, 1:03 PM
whoops jack, my wife and I were smooching and I realized that I had just spelled my name backwards...
sorry
103.
May 17, 2005, 1:54 PM
Smooching while blogging is like drinking while driving, Jordan. You are liable to be arrested by the thought police.
104.
May 17, 2005, 7:59 PM
I cant believe Ive finished reading this entire thread
yes, its about time to end it! Now lets actually talk about ART
1.
check it
May 13, 2005, 5:57 PM
http://www.artcircuits.com/c_ww.html