Previous: help out annie wharton (49)

Next: picked up by the week (9)

from last weekend at esperanto

Post #560 • June 17, 2005, 9:47 AM • 80 Comments

Images, by no means complete, from last weekend at Esperanto, curated by Chris Meesey and Jordan Massengale.

Rene Barge.

Kara Blossom.

Paula Celman.

Yours truly.

Veronica Fazzio.

Brian Geffen.

Ross Harris.

Luiseugenia Johnson.

Scott Miller.

Stephanie Perez.

Jennifer Rodriguez.

John Sanchez.

Nico Sulis.

Kerry Ware.

Photos courtesy Jordan Massengale.




June 17, 2005, 5:07 PM

Some interesting stuff here. Some of it is awkward and looks like it is still forming but there is life there, and that's more than I can say about most of what I see in Miami.

I know nothing about Esperanto. Is it a cooperative of some kind?

Also knowing sizes & mediums would help.



June 17, 2005, 6:59 PM

Unfortunately, and I suppose inevitably, many of the reproductions above do not do justice to the actual works. It's still good to have the images posted, as they're better than nothing for those who didn't get to go to the show, so they can get some idea.

The Barge photo is somewhat overexposed and fails to convey textural aspects which are very important to the visual effect of the piece.

The colors of Franklin's painting look acrid and sour relative to the real thing, which was softer and creamier, with better blending of hues.

Kerry Ware's piece is very poorly served. It may be upside down as shown, but also the colors are off and look too ashen. The real thing was more sensual, especially the blues, which had a whiff of Tiepolo.



June 17, 2005, 7:18 PM

Ross harris... definitely the best



June 17, 2005, 7:35 PM

I assume that the Harris painting will be the most liked picture here, Audi. It fits, or is headed toward, the popular current trend for thinly painted, very casual figure studies which have been discussed at length on this blog.

I hope that Harris will be conscious of and resist this trend, and strike off more independently. It is an overmined vein.



June 17, 2005, 7:38 PM

Would installation photos help? I'm wondering whether the eye can better account for scale and color when given some cues about the real-world environment, and for texture when shown the work at an angle. The works above all look very interesting, and I'd love to see what it might look like if I "were there."


Neil William

June 17, 2005, 7:41 PM

Hey Guys,
Wondering if youd be willing to post something about the below $10,000 Student Art Prize (or you may want to enter yourself!).


The deadline for entries to the $10,000 Buckingham Art Prize has been extended through July 15th, 2005.

The second annual Buckingham Prize for the Expression of Music Through Art is a juried art competition recognizing painting with a musical theme that is sponsored by the historic Buckingham Hotel and co-sponsored by the New York Studio School and The Art Students League.

The competition is open to art school students throughout the United States, with an award of $10,000 in prize money to the top three paintings. The work of the 15 semi-finalists will be shown at the New York Studio School in a show opening September 2005, and the work of the three finalists will be exhibited at the Art Students League on 57th Street.
An application form and further information is available in PDF format by visiting



June 17, 2005, 8:34 PM

The Ross Harris image has its moments -- the young lady's throat and upper chest, the background trees -- and it's a nice picture overall, but I found myself drawn to the works by Luiseugenia Johnson and Veronica Fazzio. Nico Sulis made me linger too.

Johnson's works remind me, believe it or not, of some Kenneth Noland works displayed at the MFAH last year, called called "Rough Chevrons." They don't seem to be published anywhere. I can't figure out why Noland doesn't let them out. Personally I think they're wonderful works: tactile, dimensional (I'm assuming the Johnson work above has a rough surface), and subtle. But Noland's were purely abstract, whereas it appears like Johnson is putting some figuration into the work. (Is that not the profile of a child's face, arms and torso? It looks too crisp to have been an "action.")



June 17, 2005, 8:52 PM

Franklin, I still think the artist's name should be placed below the corresponding image, not above it. That just works better.



June 17, 2005, 9:08 PM

Old Pro, Esperanto was a one weekend exhibition to show case some new talent in Miami. The space was previously called 'Objex' and was sort of a 'Low-brow' gallery which often featured artist's works from California.
Some of the art shown was made by very young artists, such as Stephanie Perez and Victor Payares (no image) who have learned the importance of context as related to sculptural form. Rene Barge (not a great digital representation I admit) always paints something fresh and intellegent for each exhibit he participates in- perhapes he deserves a studio visit from Jack, and others.
I think that exhibitions like these create community awareness and new friendships - every practicing artist, reguardless of maturity level, needs a show and a crit sometimes.



June 17, 2005, 9:36 PM

Thanks Jordon. Looks like some well-functioning talent, and a good range of styles of art making, also something we need more of around here.

I agree with Jack about the placement of names. Whenever we get a display like this I have to readjust how I put the names with the pictures over again. The names should be below and close to the picture.

Hovig, I assumed that there was a figure in the right portion of the picture. As you say, it is too sharp and also too complete to be an accident. The comparison to Noland escapes me. Do you mean the kind of Chevrons he showed at Emmerich in the late 70s?



June 17, 2005, 9:46 PM

I have very much enjoyed being a part of these little shows that Jordan and Chris put together. I like the informality and the opportunity to put up pieces that I regard as experiments.

Jack, I'm sorry, I can't see it that way. It's a vertical, descending thread, and if the image appears before the caption it's hard to relate it to anything. When I quote someone in a blockquote, I attribute it first for the same reason. Does anyone second Jack besides Oldpro?

Is that image of Kerry's upside down? That's not acceptable. Please confirm that, someone.

Ross doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the Mousey Figuration movement. For one, he actually has a background, and it works well. Secondly, he handles paint with command that shows up better in person than in the image. I have my eye on him.

Hovig, next time I'll put in installation shots. I had plenty from Jordan. Luiseugenia's pieces, believe it or not, are photograms, and the figures are herself and her son, lying on the paper. She's very talented.



June 17, 2005, 10:02 PM

Franklin, I think the association of the scrolll-down characteristic and the name placement is visually illogical. You don't look at any picture until it is full in view and then you naturally are accustomed to look below the picture, just as you would in any other titled graphic. I do a double take every time, even after I know that I shouldn't.

I qualified what I said about Harris by saying "fits or is headed toward" because I think there is talent there and, from the one picture we see, the more obvious cloying characteristics of "mousy figurative" (good term) are not present. I merely though he should be aware of the comparison - it certainly can be legitimately made - so he doesn't fall into those habits. I know this is presumtious, but there it is.



June 17, 2005, 10:04 PM

I do know how to spell "presumptuous", really I do.



June 17, 2005, 10:12 PM

jordan, this kind of show is much needed. are you organizing anything like it again? if so when and will you be looking at submissions?



June 17, 2005, 10:41 PM

Well, here's one for the books:

I concur with Jack and Oldpro!




June 17, 2005, 10:53 PM

It's a major blog milestone, Kathleen.



June 17, 2005, 11:08 PM

Captions make more sense underneath images. That is the standard to which many are accustomed and so the eye will naturally go there to seek the info--well, my eye.
The Rene Barge painting looks very interesting, like he's exploding painting apart to investigate the hallmarks of abstraction--a mark there, a swipe here--and I am struck by Franklin's bouyant (sp?) touch and open palette-not trading on the neutrals as much but creating a lush, open-ended field: way to go.



June 17, 2005, 11:34 PM

Oldpro - I've never seen anything like those Noland works before, and believe me I've googled the hell out of it. If I'm not mistaken they all said "collection of the artist" and they were dated post-2000. The chevrons he's commonly associataed with are of course in the same bright colors as his famous targets, on a blank canvas. [Google image search here.]

The ones displayed last year in Houston were blue-black V-shapes on which it looked as though he had laid plaster randomly with a large trowel. In fact they were nested V-shapes, so that there were V-shaped borders in the work. "Within the lines," they looked almost exactly like the Johnson work above, especially the region in the upper-right corner of her work, except that Noland's were impastoed with thick paint. The paint was creamy, off-white, pasty and translucent, so you could see varying regions of blue-black through it.

From a distance it almost looked like collaged old newspapers. They look like nothing I'd ever seen from Noland, and there didn't seem to be any notes in the wall text explaining where they came from or what they were. At the risk of damning the rest of his well-known body of work, I thought they were the best pieces I'd seen from him.



June 18, 2005, 1:12 AM

Yes Franklin, Kerry's painting is upside down, it's supposed to be a landscape.



June 18, 2005, 1:43 AM

Paula, as the proud owner of the Kerry Ware piece, I am not so sure he would agree with you as to whether it is shown here as upside down. Before he took it from me the other day to hang in the show, we looked at it all manner of ways and he didn't seem to have a preference one way or the other. I however do hang it the way I ( and presumably you) tend to see it, which is as a landscape.



June 18, 2005, 2:03 AM

Hovig - very interesting. I was actually referring to the thick chevrons he did in the 80s (there is one on the google site you posted) but what you describe is completely different. I would love to see an example.



June 18, 2005, 2:18 AM

In order to show the picture as it was at the opening, the "Tiepolo" (thanks jack) blue would be at the top. No big deal though!



June 18, 2005, 2:48 AM

It's better with the blue on top.

Try running the image through auto levels in Photoshop, Ware. Interesting?



June 18, 2005, 3:44 AM

I have righted Kerry's painting. My apologies.



June 18, 2005, 3:55 AM

And because I respect you people so much, we now have a CSS class called "caption" that puts the image attribution at the bottom like you want and does the visual grouping that I want. What do you think?



June 18, 2005, 4:09 AM

Excellent. Thanks for the respect, but it just works better.


Rene Barge

June 18, 2005, 4:31 AM

Thank you for posting the delightful images of Esperantu, Teen Spirit... not like Kurt Cobain said, but rather Calvin Johnston before him.
Thank you Jordan for your comment and suggesting a studio visit, anyone who's interest in looking (or listening) is always welcome in my home, Kerry Ware often stops by, and it would be nice to have others of the same ilk over as well, I may have a gathering of such in the near future as I have finished some drawings. I will have to keep Go See Art posted.
Elizabeth, in reference to your comment #17... my working with paint is not far from my working with sound, only that I am painting, however my desires are the same, the recent developement in digital technologies have afforded us nothing new, but rather have opened up possibilities towards refreshing things. Acoustics as such within the frame work of a space do cause for investigating hallmarks indeed. Much around the same time of Abstract Ex and Colorfield painting, there where a very small bunch who investigated the space between radio stations. Today we drop, and yes microtones and micro samples explode.



June 18, 2005, 7:04 AM

It is good to see



June 18, 2005, 1:28 PM

Very nice solution, Franklin. You do good work.


Dervis n Isabel

June 18, 2005, 6:47 PM

- had exceptional work in this show!



June 18, 2005, 7:03 PM

Yes I agree - how did Dervis do that hologram? Isabel Riguad had an excellent photo instalation of medium scale color prints - did she print them herself? Or does that matter?



June 18, 2005, 7:22 PM

I liked Isabel's work especially. I admire that her work could come off as cloying but doesn't - the images of her son are convincingly psychological and beautifully lit.



June 18, 2005, 8:02 PM

Go See Art now gives you a choice between all receptions and opening receptions only. Does that work, or is it confusing?



June 18, 2005, 8:53 PM

This is periferally interesting at best, but the Ross Harris painting is of Veronica Fernandes, who just wrote a piece over on Critical Miami. The other painting he had in the show was of a carpet and table, with no figures, so there.

Yes, Isabel does print her own work.

The Brian Geffen sculpture deserved to be much better photographed. The Nico Sulis sculpture, on the other hand, is extremely well photographed.

If oldpro likes to create interesting effects by manipulating photos of paintings in photoshop, I would recommend the "Invert" command. Also it's frequently remarked that "Radial Blur" improves most paintings.



June 18, 2005, 9:46 PM

photoshop and its Radial Blur improve all paintings,,, Radial Blur , and its inhuman affects should be studied by all painters who want to matter.



June 18, 2005, 9:47 PM

isabel moros rigau work was easily the most resolved work in this show.



June 18, 2005, 9:52 PM

Nice solution, Franklin. However, at the risk of being difficult (well, OK, I am difficult), I'd prefer the name at lower right, not lower left.



June 18, 2005, 10:25 PM

Franklin, I like the captions better under than over too.
What might help a bit more would be making the spacing unequal with a little more space between the caption and the following image if there is one.

Also, I'm curious about the size of Rene Barge's painting, about how wide is it?



June 18, 2005, 11:05 PM

I think I was more fond of Kerry's painting when inverse.


what's all this?

June 18, 2005, 11:39 PM

i'm afraid that this discussion has hardly advanced with most comments made on this post; y'all need to freshen up on the guidelines for this blog.

about the esperanto show, considering its swift arrangement, it had some good pieces that are worth discussing BUT to dwell on the "straight-out-of-the-tube" look rene barge's painting has is almost unforgivable! i mean really, where do we have to stand to look at it as an "intelligent" piece? not even the pallette is mentionable.

what are you guys looking at? please explain!

oh! and luiseugenia's photogram...what was that? where's the "talent?" her son probably made them alone and she exploited that; i suppose that's the talent....what gives?


the stephanie perez piece was a good/thoughtful attempt at something difficult: making sense of materials and the space they occupy. yes, it's an old idea but it's worth exploring, even if it's mimicking an established piece or artist.

the MSG Newness music video was quaint with much logic but it wasn't more than a music video, right? maybe those immense breasts make it more of a social commentaire, i guess.

ah. it's good these things happen. the sense of community thing is a little dream-like, worthy of investigation, though more realistically it's more about networking; who you know, not what your work conveys... wo. very negative (maybe) but honest.



June 18, 2005, 11:50 PM

Jack, it looks like you can have text and image right-aligned, as it is at the moment. Through CSS hackery I can do a left-aligned image and right-aligned caption, but it looks bad IMO on vertical pieces like Kerry's and Nico's.



June 19, 2005, 12:13 AM

Speaking of MSG Newness, the MSG Newness party band (are they still calling themselves the Blues Fuckers?) starring Alesh Houdek on percussion will be performing tonight in Lummus Park (downtown, by the river, somewhere). Free beer and food! 8pm! Don't miss this one, Dorsch Gallery aficionados and art lovers everywhere!



June 19, 2005, 12:29 AM

But what about the openings at Faktura, White Vinyl and Damian Rojo which is happening on the 7100 block of NW 2 ct in little Haiti? I believe they too will have free beer...but no sushi.



June 19, 2005, 2:17 AM

Thanks for all the dialogue about my painting. It was a really random but interesting show, with some choice pieces, although I believe Isabel's photographs should have been posted.

Yes, the colors and overall feel of the paintings are of course lost with casual digi snapshots, especially on something like Kerry Ware's painting, which was incredibly subtle, elegant and difficult to display well. (It would look best with very careful lighting and maybe separated and alone.) Some of the work was super studenty, but probably because they are students, and that would make sense.

Oldpro: probably someone mentioned this already, but Esperanto is a language invented in the 19thc to make communication much easier since it was a simple language that was easier to learn. It never caught on, but people still actually learn and communicate with the language. (

Also, I realise the trend you mentioned has been talked about quite a bit on this blog, but you making note of it seems slightly ignorant as I really, sincerly doubt that it is even a sweeping trend of contemporary painting. Just because we can all rattle off a few names of painters who vaugely fit that description doesn't mean it is running rampant. Look at really famous, "right now" painters in the Saatchi's "Triumph of Painting." There are paintings that are milky and abstacted, near photorealistic, paintings that look like children's book illustrations, cold and colorless paintings, large figurative work, paintings that look a little Frank Frazetta, small and sensitive watercolors, and the thin fashiony paintings. If anything new painting is possibly more diverse than ever before, and I for one am looking forward to the future of painting with some kind of promise. Anyway, I'm 100% sure your work is infuenced by the era in which you where taught, (Am I correct?) so when did "movements" become "trends"? Its all too easy and, frankly, pompous, to be constantly bitter and annoyed with what is new.

Jordan and Chris are amazing. Thanks again for putting together such a fun show!



June 19, 2005, 3:44 AM

I know what Esperanto is, Ross, thanks all the same.

I never said that "mousy figuration", as Franklin termed it, was "running rampant" or was a "sweeping trend", but if you have any kind of eye for style it is easy to see that it is currently very fashionable. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but most of the work done this way has the feeling of collapsing into the style to gain little else but a mannered "look". Most of it just isn't very good. I thought your picture showed talent along with elements of that style and I expressed the hope that you would not fall into the same morass, that's all. There was no need for such a strong reaction on your part. Good luck and I look forward to see more of your work.

I have expressed my disdain for all kinds of things on this blog but there is no "bitterness" involved at all, only straight-out displeasure. There's a difference. And you have no right to assume that I am "annoyed by what is new". In fact, I have repeatedly expressed the wish to see something new, anything new, anything which breaks away from the tired, overdone, mannered, tedious work so amply represented by the very thing I was talking about, something actually new, not just recent. There is nothing "new" about the stuff we see everywhere now, so eagerly shoved in our faces by these artists and these galleries. Most of it was thoroughly wilted 40 years ago, and I can claim to know because I was there looking at it back then. But the artists don't know recent art history, the gallerys don't care and the collectors don't know the difference. Come up with something truly new and I will be the first to applaud.



June 19, 2005, 6:44 AM

Following up on the notion behind the responses to the cloying characteristics of "mousy figurative" as a "sweeping trend" prevalent at the moment.

I don't think so. Friday is "roundup day" here in NYC (the museums are free Friday nights) So, I went to the Whitney Museum to see the "Remote Viewing" exhibition of paintings.
Quick link detour for a bunch of details, pics etc.
Art News Info
ABC news coverage
David Cohen at Art Critical
A review by Grace Gleuck in the June 3, 2005 NY Times.

Image Googles for the artists in the show because thw Whitney doesn't have any pics up.
Franz Ackermann
Steve DiBenedetto
Carroll Dunham
Ati Maier
Julie Mehretu
Matthew Ritchie
Alexander Ross
Terry Winters

First off the Whitney site showcased one of Mathew Ritchie's paintings which was a good thing because his installation was a travesty to painting. (If you're young and hip, maybe someone could explain to me what he's all about, the paintings were actually ok but the "installation stuff" sucked big time)

The real reason I'm bringing this show up is because I read that the curators picked these eight but there were many more working in this vein. More specifically, it was mentioned as a "Williamsburg" phenomena, (Williamsburg is a neighborhood in Brooklyn) This seemed interesting especially in relation to the groups of artists in Miami and the Esperanto show.

So what am I alluding to? In an artists formative years, I don't think it is so important where one is working, as long as there is a critical mass of peers. In my opinion the best reason for attending an art school is this critical mass of like minded people. It is the camaraderie, the jostling and the competition which provides a supporting environment to move forward. Someone has to say, "hey, that sucks" but at the same time you need to supply an alternative and make your point with it. All the whining and back biting over who's getting the bone is wasted psychic energy.

It needs to become tribal. I think what Franklin is doing with Go See Art is a good idea. Galleries like Dorsch really need help, and I don't understand why some of the artist who have exhibited there don't pitch in and get his website up to date. You are in Miami, but it's not Afghanistan, the internet is changing how information is disseminated and people who live elsewhere need to be able to access the information. Otherwise, Miami will remain a backwater art scene for 50 weeks of the year.



June 19, 2005, 7:09 AM

George: You always come up with meaty stuff. Interesting group of pix. I guess the idea is that there is a "Williamsburg Phenomena" which consists of artist making these frenzied, overcomplicated pictures, and that this vindicates painting somehow.

I completely agree with your "critical mass" and "synergy" and "tribal" ideas (which merit more discussion) but of course that elusive thing called talent has to be chugging away in the middle of the mix. It doesn't seem to be keeping company with the Phenomenal Williamsburgers, unfortunately.

As for Dorsch's web site, something must be done. Will someone forcefully commandeer the place and bring it up to date?



June 19, 2005, 7:16 AM

A revamped website is in the works at Dorsch; I plan to consult with him before this weekend is over. In the meantime, though: Happy Birthday, Brook!



June 19, 2005, 7:28 AM

Oldpro, Regarding the "Remote Viewing" show, I had a number of interesting reactions ending in the thought that I'll go back and see it again next week.
My primary response was that I didn't want to look at the paintings, I thought that was really wierd. Most of the time when I'm in a museum I'm jumping for joy, people actually come up and ask me questions. At the Whitney, I don't know what it was the works in this show make some references to Pollock and field painting but the're all trying so fucking hard to fill up the page with little details.
FWIW, IMO, Julie Mehretu won the contest, precisely for what she managed to leave out.

A short walk downstairs, there's a Pollock, he did it all with a flip of the wrist. Neverthe less someone could make the associative link here with field painting. The fact that a group of individuals become linked, physically or electronically, with a common idea is what forms trends. To you(Op) and me this doesn't really matter because we already know what instrument we are playing. For younger artists the need to find both validation and excitement predominates, it's a fun time but it eventually passes.u


Rene Barge

June 19, 2005, 7:41 AM

George thanks for sharing insight on your evening, I like most of those painters paintings. I couldn't answer your question on the length of "drops between stations", I've forgotten where I left the piece, but I think it is about 2' long by 1' high.
In reference to the Dorsch Gallery, having exhibited there, and having had a residence there as well... the only thing I can make of it, despite its name, is that Dorsch Gallery is simply a space to exhibit work. The word Gallery and web site might as well not even exist. I believe that an article on Julie Kahns work recently in Artpapers, even mentioned Dorsch Gallery as the only non commercial space in the area.
In reference to comment #40... "straight out of the tube" are some of my works (Carvin Amplification!), not all though. In that particular painting... not only is the paint out of the tube, but all mediums handled... are out of the bottle. Drops Between Radio Stations was all to do with mark making and marks made. Perhaps as you would say, " making sense of materials (abstract paint matter) and the space they occupy (the canvas was purchased straight out of the art store!)
Best Wishes,


Rene Barge, Again.

June 19, 2005, 8:05 AM

Old Pro,
Yes, this is meaty stuff, and lots of it quite precise. During 1999-2001 I got to see much of this work and it did freeze me up... it took long days of looking at this stuff to begin to feel comfortable with it. T. Winters form always left me wondering about thought process during painting much longer than G. Richter ever did, and during this time there was much hype about his writings in relationship to thought process during painting.
Also, my last sonic shows in New York where in Williamsburg 2000-2001, and it was frightening trendy, the whole validation and excitement thing and its passing (George's comment) just filled copy, and tongued falsetto's during party conversation, but cream rises, and made sifting much easier.


Rene Barge, even once more!

June 19, 2005, 8:08 AM

Bare Foot Merlot is good,
Good Night!



June 19, 2005, 2:41 PM

Rene Barge - nice painting! My friend and I can only offer 2 for it - is it for sale?



June 19, 2005, 3:17 PM

Yes, I like the painting also, but judging from the web picture I don't think the color quite works. The mixed color of those pictures Dorsch had at the Abstraction show worked much better. Those were nice paintings.

Alesh, thanks for the radial blur tip. I will check it out. I like playing with photographs with Photoshop (i did a series of "Zelig" type fakes when I was learning the program) but with images of paintings I am usually just trying to make corrections.


line weight

June 19, 2005, 3:23 PM

the next show will be called 'CHARCOAL', and this exhibit will be primarily about exclusion - involving;



June 19, 2005, 3:38 PM

Rene, Thanks for the info on "drops between stations" Suprisingly, just knowing the approximate size adds to what I think i'm seeing in all those pixels pretending to be paint.
At 2 feet wide, the digital file is roughly 17 pixels to the inch, so a pixel is about 1/16 of an iunch square. That's fairly small, so I'm seeing more of whats actually there than I thought. So, the white mark looks like it was made with a 1-1.5 inch brush, and the dots are about the size of my finger tip. Digital archaeology, whatever, I liked it.



June 19, 2005, 4:33 PM

Following up on the Dorsch commentary...

The artworld has entered the communication age but I'm not referring to content or style. The internet, gallery websites, artists websites, journalistic websites, and blogging have radically changed how information is delivered and networked. While this has been going on for several years starting with the more pedestrian list format it has evolved explosively over the last couple of years.

I'm in a peculiar position as an observer, I've been "out of the loop" for several years, so I'm viewing a lot of the current events somewhat like a thirty year old. An example, one of the things I noticed. Two, maybe three years ago, artists who had websites were poo-pooed. Especially by the senior artists and maybe the galleries who feared the artist might sell the work from under then. At best they were viewed as vanity sites like the "Yahoo slash Artists slash Personal_Exhibits slash"

In my opinion, this is no longer true. A new generation has taken over the artworld. They went to a University which required they own a computer. They had access to T1 lines for fast delivery of porn. They had email and instant messaging, fruit boxes in their pocket or purse with their lives on it. Now everything is migrating to the cell phone. The new generation is now connected and this is as big a revolution as Television Television ushered in "postmodernism" and that (whatever you want to call it) cellphone with a camera, browser, and your life on it will put the stake in postmodernism, as a passing moment in history.

So. If you live in Miami, you can be just as electronically connected as someone in NYC or LA or... but you have to play this game on its own terms. So when I bitch about the Dorsch it is intended as a prod, you know those taser sticks they use to move cattle, to get someone there moving. Remember, I'm in NYC, the closest I ever got to Miami was the convention center in orlando ug! so I'm just going on what I see here. If it is a non-commercial space, then those of you who participate there need to "kick it up a notch" if you want to be taken seriously by the rest of the art world. Nobody has to do anything, but here in NYC, in the boroughs, young artists are deadly serious, careerist and working their asses off. The barking dog gets the bone.



June 19, 2005, 5:53 PM

...and the dog who pleases his master gets Kibbles & Bits


Rene Barge

June 19, 2005, 6:59 PM

Good Morning,
George, I see where you're coming from. Dorsch should be prodded and there is no reason why he should not enter the market seriously and competitavely.
Oldpro, I stayed away from mixing or blending color for the purpose of investigating marks on this one, they are only different from the paintings in the abstraction show in this particular sense, I wanted to see a disparity. I was investigating a subtle flow and collision of marks that I could confirm through the tension of the direct color used and later continue to use with the process of blend and mix. In the hopes to further excite future surfaces.
Manuelo, the painting is for sale, contact me at



June 19, 2005, 7:07 PM

The idea of experimenting with a lot of highly saturated colors is a good one, Rene, but making a successful painting this way is extremely difficult and must be supported by some structural device. The only artist I know of who consistently did it well is Hans Hofmann, in some of the late pix ca 1958-1965. Take a look at those.


Rene Barge

June 19, 2005, 7:27 PM

Thanks Oldpro,
I will begin just shortly!



June 19, 2005, 8:35 PM

Killing time this morning and ran across a link for this cute Flash program on Tom Moodys blog

It's a flash drawing pad, works fairly well until you take it as far I did in my drawing. (I just started after the existing pic of the duck was drawn)
What's curious is the way it works. By storing a list of actions, it allows you to replay the process from start to end. Near the end there was about a 2 second lag between a mouse move and a mark, ya have to adapt to it like playing an old computer game.

PS, requires Flash



June 19, 2005, 9:08 PM

Rene, I'm not saying that Dorsch should become a commercial gallery.
That depends on what he wants to do. If I was an artist living in Miami I would want every opportunity to have my work seen, even if it was only on the web, one thing leads to another. It's not my business to butt in on someone elses project, I'm sure he (sorry but I don't know his name) is doing what he can. Situations like this can be tricky, he may not want outside interference.

On the other hand there is no reason why any artist can't put up at least a minimal website with decent photographs of their work. This is not really an expensive project, yearly hosting rates are reasonable. Working up the site requires a bit of work but it seems like there are several of you who know how it's done. Then, even if it's an experimental show like this one or one of Dorsch's, Franklin would have links and photos to post here or on Go See Art.

If an artist wants to be taken seriously, he/she needs to look the part. There are a lot of factors which affect the path of a career. Everyone gets lucky at some point, the big breaks come to those who are prepared to handle them.

All this is just an observation from an outsider. I'm sure everyone is doing what they need to given their own personal circumstances. My only point is that the internet has recently become a valuable tool, especially for artists outside the major commercial art centers and it's there for those who choose to use it.



June 19, 2005, 11:55 PM

Paul Klee's work finds home in Bern. I don't really know how to hyperlink or anything so hopefully if you copy-paste this:
it wiil get you to the article.


Oh boy

June 20, 2005, 7:59 AM

What is all the babble about this Dorsh gallery? Is this the only gallery in Miami? There has to be other galleries that have perfectly fine websites with fine artist to boot.



June 20, 2005, 8:55 AM

Oh Boy, So, precisely, what is your point? What do you think you are speaking about? I'm not from Miami but I am paying attention. I am aware of the other venues with websites. What is most interesting to me is, that however lackluster the Dorsch gallery seems to be run, it's operation seems to intimidated other artists by it's presence. As an outside observer, I cannot help noticing these biases. I am only interested in great art, art that brings you to tears. Who is closer to the edge? What do you think you know that I don't? I am all ears.



June 20, 2005, 2:58 PM

There are plenty of other galleries, Oh Boy, and they have been discussed at length on previous pages. Some have functioning web pages and some don't. Some of the artists shown above, on this page, are associated with Dorsch. That's the way the discussion turned. No big deal.



June 20, 2005, 5:07 PM

An interesting read from todays NY Times book reviews...

"A Different Universe": You Are More Important Than a Quark

Read the first chapter here.

snippet (emphasis mine)
"Thus eighty years after the discovery of the ultimate theory we find ourselves in difficulty. The repeated, detailed experimental confirmation of these relationships has now officially closed the frontier of reductionism at the level of everyday things. Like the closing of the American frontier, this is a significant cultural event, causing thoughtful people everywhere to debate what it means for the future of knowledge. There is even a best-selling book exploring the premise that science is at an end and that meaningful fundamental discovery is no longer possible. At the same time, the list of even very simple things found "too difficult" to describe with these equations continues to lengthen alarmingly."



June 20, 2005, 5:57 PM

You follow the markets, George. What is the classic sign of change?

That's right. It's when people say no more change is possible.



June 20, 2005, 7:03 PM

Op, yeh. I haven't read the whole book yet but it's the kind of topic I read.
What I found interesting were the parallels between science and art. In particular what you were referring to, the old "painting is dead" and "everything has been invented" syndrome. Of course we know this isn't true, but as you note, when the parrot starts to speak it's a fairly good sign that something is about to hit you from out of the blue.

Further on he made this observation, again emphasis is mine...
"A field of flowers rendered by Renoir or Monet strikes us as interesting because it is a perfect whole, while the daubs of paint from which it is constructed are randomly shaped and imperfect. The imperfection of the individual brush strokes tells us that the essence of the painting is its organization. Similarly, the ability of certain metals to expel magnetic fields exactly when they are refrigerated to ultralow temperatures strikes us as interesting because the individual atoms out of which the metal is made cannot do this.

hmm, and a theoretical physicist to boot



June 20, 2005, 7:14 PM

Interesting comparison, but I donl't get the second part. He writes:

But presumably "individual atoms" of a plain old iron magnet can't do it either, or at least we can't test it so it isn't known. Why the temperature information?



June 20, 2005, 7:16 PM

Damn, I did something wrong. the quote i referred to was:

Similarly, the ability of certain metals to expel magnetic fields exactly when they are refrigerated to ultralow temperatures strikes us as interesting because the individual atoms out of which the metal is made cannot do this.



June 20, 2005, 7:34 PM

Op, without reading the book, it appears that the phenomena he is referring to is something which can happen at higher levels of organization but don't occur at the molecular or atomic level.

If we dispense with the atomic paradigm we could use ants as an example. An individual ant can run around, leave a chemical trail, waggle its antennae, but overall it's pretty dumb. Put a bunch of ants together and the aggregate of all this dumb behaviour starts to create an anthill with a purpose. At one level the communication between ants appears as more or less random behaviour. At another, the individual ant actions become self organizing, on ant doing one task and another a different one so that in the end the ants behave with an apparently singular purpose.

Another example would be crowd behavious. Crowds will do things that none of the individual participants would do on their own.

You really don't want to know about the Hall effect



June 20, 2005, 8:09 PM

I understand the individual/crowd difference & comparison, but I still don't know why he brings up the temperature matter or how something like magnetic behavior can be observed on the atomic level anyway.

Thanks for the link. Yes, I do want to know all about quantum mechanics. Whether I ever will is another matter.



June 20, 2005, 10:57 PM

George, I was also interested in that article in the NYT book section! That and the one about the brain/ethics . . .

OP, though the author of the book seems to talk about art, he is only doing so as a means of helping the layman understand the operational shift in the way scientific researchers and theoreticians have been operating. He uses painting as an example to show that people have only been focussing on the individual brushstrokes in science, rather than the big picture. In terms of metals, the atoms individually do not expell a magnetic field while at ultralow temperatures, yet do so collectively. The specific condition which activates the collective function is the ultralow temperature. Also, think electromagnetic when you read magnetic, that may help you visualise it on an atomic level.

I really like Rene Barge's painting. I've heard the critisism about paint "straight out of the tube" before, though in respect to a different artist, and I don't quite get it. I think that anyone criticizing a composer for using the standard tuning on a piano would be roundly pounded as pompous. You can use lapis lazuli and encaustic and still make a poor painting. I think that the "paint straight of the tube" argument is really a cloaked critique of skill, and ought to be dumped from any forthright thinker's toolbox.



June 20, 2005, 11:37 PM

Thanks, Kathleen, but I am still confused. I certainly understand that a substabnce under different conditions can behave differently, but how do we know what the atoms are doing "individually" in the first place? I wasn't aware that there was any way to detrermine this. Also is "expel" a scientific term for the generation of a magnetic field? Sounds odd.

I like Rene's painting too, though I think the actual management of the colors could be better. Obviously no categorical objection to any kind of use of paint is valid. It only takes one good example to knock that down.



June 21, 2005, 12:27 AM

The colors in the Barge painting worked better live. The photo is overexposed to some degree, which causes a subtle bleaching effect and a loss of richness. The textural details are also de-emphasized by the reproduction, which further dulls the character of the piece. As for the "straight out of the tube" business, it's not worth addressing, just as criticizing a marble sculpture for using "fetish" material is beneath comment.



June 21, 2005, 1:07 AM

Op but how do we know what the atoms are doing "individually" in the first place?

This is the purview of high energy particle physics. Smashing things together and then looking at the "tracks", the debris after the crash in a bubble chamber (cool pics) Basically what they do is look at the paths of the debris, from this they can infer the mass, spin, charge and other esoterica.

I think the word "expel" is being used to indicate the magnetic field is not continuous. The notion that the Hall efect takes on the quantized values at ultra low temperatures would imply that the strength of the magnetic field would pulse in strength. (quantized values means the change is not smooth and continuous but stepped between discrete levels with no events in between)



June 21, 2005, 3:25 AM

Thanks George. I will let it go at this point and read up on Q.M. so I understand the stuff better.

Jack, I can believe it. I will be interested to see more work by him.



June 21, 2005, 3:58 PM

This article in todays NY Times on jellyfish is interesting and has some nice photos as well. So we are more important than a quark but the jellyfish is catching up?



Other Projects


Design and content ©2003-2023 Franklin Einspruch except where otherwise noted