Previous: must - not - stroke - chin (45)

Next: dorsch gallery garage sale (150)

triffisk

Post #550 • June 2, 2005, 3:01 PM • 54 Comments

Let me preface the following by saying that I occasionally write for the Miami New Times, in case you don't know. Furthermore, I do so at the pleasure of Alfredo Triff, who almost certainly had something to do with the fact that Artblog.net got selected as Best Local Website this year by the New Times.

Triff wrote a double review this week. The first part praised Julie Kahn's Swamp Cabbage to the skies, and rightly so. Kahn deserves a huge amount of respect for the effort she put into this project and the success with which she pulled it off.

The second part covered At This Time chez Rubell. Now, Triff has a PhD in philosophy from New York University, and tends to like work that excites him philosophically. I'm not going to begrudge him that preference, nor any other. If he thinks of Cooper's rambling assemblage as "angst-ridden," if he characterizes Bert Rodriguez as "truly a Miami Duchamp" (like we need one, but no matter, I don't buy it), and finds Naomi Fisher's asscrack ikebana "visually enticing," well, whatev. I feel entitled to wonder whether he's shooting up a cocktail of PCP, oxycontin, and Viagra, but again, whatev.

However, this just won't do:

Miami and its art scene are relatively young, and with an eye on the future, one easily understands why shows like this are needed: They bring to light historic points of reference for tomorrow's artists and historians.

Christ on a bike - historic? The in-house curator puts together a show of local artists pulled from the in-house collection, sixty percent of whom hail from a single gallery, and the result provides a framework with which future artists and historians will ponder our era? This is almost as bad as the press release.

Its current exhibit suggests, beyond its themes, that Miami artists are internationally respected.

Evidence. I need evidence. I need a big, steaming pile of evidence, because the local collector's fondness for certain local artists, as far as I can figure it out, indicates local respect and nothing more. It may be true (cough), but I don't follow the path by which we arrive at international respect.

I mean, come on. I don't dispute the Rubells' importance, by which I mean brute-force financial clout, and they can spend their money on pork futures for all I care. But this show reflects their tastes. That's all. They like things that make them uncomfortable - Don Rubell said as much to the New York Times. To extrapolate out anything more - like the importance of this exhibition to posterity - is overblown.

The passive voice used in why shows like this are needed bothers me. Who needs this show? If an artist wants to tailor his work to match the tastes of the collectors, this show will serve as an excellent reference. Otherwise, I plan to continue to rely on more solid sources than the whims of these collectors, as entitled as they are to them. If anyone asked, I would recommend that he do the same.

Comment

1.

Didn'tAskWouldn'tTell

June 2, 2005, 10:28 PM

Thank you so much, Franklin. I was really ticked that Jack commented so positively about the Triff piece. I really like Alfredo's writing and ran out to get a fresh copy of the New Times, but felt the Rubell piece was really sad. BUT! The Julie Kahn piece was right on target and Triff at his best. Why didn't Jack tell us about that. Now, for the sake of being forthright, I am the publisher of The Biscayne Boulevard Times. When K. Lee Sohn turned in her piece on the Rubell exhibit I was very happy, particularly in light of the fact that I knew her article would be coming out today and yesterday's blog was full of comments concerning the sad state of art criticism. Take a look at www.BiscayneBoulevard.com Look for the link to CultureVoid. BTW Franklin I have been reading ArtBlog ever since New Times mentioned it last month. Thanks, Skip Van Cel

2.

George

June 2, 2005, 10:49 PM

I'm atta loss for words.
Need more pixels.

3.

oldpro

June 2, 2005, 11:31 PM

I am at a loss for words too because I am laughing so hard at "asscrack ikebana".

(For those who think an ikebana might be a dirty bathhouse: it is the Japanese art of formal lfower arrangement).

4.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 12:02 AM

Actually I owe Triff a favor for this review. I had said a few blogs back, in regard to that fellow with the odd name who is showing at the Whitney, that number one on the list of cliche forms in contemporary art is the pod, followed by the house on stilts. That got me thinking that i should make a list, but it is easy to recognize these things when you see them but hard to just pick them out of the air.

Alfredo, in this review, has generously supplied me with several more:

things lined up in rows
altars
boats & vessels
and, coming up fast since Cattelan's suspended equine-nimity: horses.

Does anyone in the world , when looking at this kind of thing, just simply think "this stuff is really silly"? Only me and Dave Barry, I guess. I guess we better be careful; that naked emperor is going to be pissed.

And will someone PLEASE take a stand against "legendary"? Every goddam thing that gets any notice at all is "legendary" these days. At least some writers have the decency to give a nod to the actual meaning of the word by using it for some past extravagance, but the Rubell collection is NOT "legendary" It is sitting in a building in Wynwood. You can go see it tomorrow,

5.

alyssa fogleman

June 3, 2005, 12:12 AM

I think this was Jon's point - which was so easily wisked off in yesterday's postings with all that WW2 "trivial" pursuit. I'll have to let Jon speak for himself, but alas, it seems it might take a legitimate (wait, is the BBTs even legitimate, hmmmm...) publication to punch it through more clearly on these boards...

By Kerri Lee Sohon

Most of the reputable art writers in Miami are artists themselves, hardly the sort of unbiased person that will be taken seriously in a situation such as this. Miami needs a Jerry Saltz (Village Voice) or Michael Kimmelman (New York Times), but then again there’s no educational backbone for this sort of expertise.

Not a single university in Miami-Dade offers a PhD in Art History, or a Master’s in Arts Criticism, or a even a “Contemporary Art track” within a Bachelor’s degree.
It’s not that artists can’t be intelligent writers, or write accurate and meaningful pieces on a show such as “10 Miami Artists,” even if they are completely over the bitterness of not being chosen for the show.

But if they trash said exhibit, who isn’t going to shrug off their negative outlook on jealousy? Especially those parties involved: Snitzer and the Rubell Collection. To critique in a way where these people may actually reconsider a practice or decision is difficult enough. And from a clearly prejudiced voice – Ha! The analysis will be junked immediately.

In other words: Move Tryff (and Franklin) Get Out the Way. The kids are taking over (both the galleries and now seemingly, the roles of Miami's established art critics).

6.

haters

June 3, 2005, 12:12 AM

Maybe if Franklin was in the rubell collection he'd play a different tune

7.

Manute

June 3, 2005, 12:22 AM

yes Haters, and that tune would be....

"$$$$$$"

8.

Cisco Kid

June 3, 2005, 1:00 AM

since Wynwood is not the "color of preference" of good anglosaxon oldpro, it can never be legendary... bring new glasses so you can process brown tones...

9.

Harlan Erskine

June 3, 2005, 1:04 AM

Miami does not NEED shows like this. Maybe they are good for the Miami art world. but words like NEED are too strong and have the wrong context for this show. I like the Rubells and I like going to their shows and I'm happy for their success and renovation but Miami really NEEDS affordable housing and a more livable urban core and more independent curators who are not also gallery owners, artists hawking themselves and collectors showing off their collections because art ought to have motivation other than money sometimes. The Rubells are a overall good force but sadly all too powerful force in Miami maybe if the Museums and large galleries had more clout in the scene they would offset the Rubells and give everyone some breathing room. I wonder if Londoners feel the same way about Saatchi? At least they have other non-Saatchi entities to try to balance him but it would be and interesting comparison.

10.

dpro

June 3, 2005, 1:07 AM

Here comes the personal taunt brigade again. Can't you guys do better?

Damn, I got ageism, now I get anglosaxonism and earthcolorism. They will find a way, somehow.

11.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 1:15 AM

Alyssa, when you say "who wouldn't" ascribe a negative comment to jealousy (I think you mean envy), the answer is I wouldn't, and, if I may, Franklin wouldn't. And i am sure many of our contributors wouldn't. Some people do not give motives unless they have better evidence than that.

With all due respect i think you are talking about yourself here, not some general condition.

12.

Harlan Erskine

June 3, 2005, 1:19 AM

I'm sorry was I personal? how was that too personal?

take a deep breath and hold it.

then let it out. now don't that feel better?

13.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 1:23 AM

Sorry, Harlan, my post went in after yours and did not refer to it at all. I was referring to Haters and Manute.

14.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 1:24 AM

And Cisco Kid

15.

Jack

June 3, 2005, 1:26 AM

Skip (#1), you misunderstood my comment (#11 in the previous thread). I wanted people to read Triff's piece on the Rubell show as an example of the current state of newspaper art writing (at least locally), and then use it as a point of departure for discussion. I deliberately avoided addressing the quality of Triff's article, waiting for others to read it and/or for Franklin to link to it.

Now that he has, I can say that, as far as I'm concerned, it's a non-review, even though it qualifies as art journalism. There is precious little criticism in it, which is what I want and expect from a critic. What there is alternately vague ("poetic"), evasive-noncommittal ("cryptic and angst-ridden"), facile-superficial ("cleverly framed"), and equivocal ("visually enticing," which could mean "nice photos," "nice tropical plants" or "nice ass"). In some cases (Young, Lei Rodriguez and, notably, Bas, who was the star attraction), there is simply no way to tell what Triff thought of the quality of the work as such, which I find unacceptable. He must really have loved Jiae Hwang's drawings, for which he managed to venture "delicate, witty, and humorous;" I hope it wasn't too strenuous an exertion of opinion.

It's fine to talk about symbols and presumed thematic links between artists, but a critic of visual art must look at the work as a visual object and evaluate its success as such, which is crucial. If the work does not succeed that way, its intended or ascribed meaning makes little difference from the standpoint of visual art. That's why a good critic MUST have an exceptionally good eye, not just philosophical and/or intellectual proclivities. Image first, message after.

16.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 1:29 AM

Skip: Thanks for stopping by. (Link to the article here.)

George: Critical Miami has a couple.

Oldpro: "Today a legend can also be a person or achievement worthy of inspiring such a storyanyone or anything whose fame promises to be enduring, even if the renown is created more by the media than by oral tradition. Thus we speak of the legendary accomplishments of a major-league baseball star or the legendary voice of a famous opera singer. This usage is common journalistic hyperbole, and 55 percent of the Usage Panel accepts it." Common journalistic hyperbole? Isn't that, like, oxymoronic?

Alyssa: Oh, where to start...

I think this was Jon's point...

But we don't know for sure, do we? And that was my point.

Triff is not an artist. He's a musician. Ditto Omar Somereyns (not an artist). I don't know whether CSdJ is or not. Michelle Weinberg is. I am. We're not hitting "most" here.

UM actually does offer a PhD in art history, or at least they did the last time I checked; although Sohon might technically be correct in that it doesn't produce any great number of graduates. I can't name any. Masters programs in art criticism are extremely unusual - I know of three: SVA, Case-Western, and Bard. Jerry Saltz trained as an artist. Kimmelman is a fine amateur concert pianist but I don't know his academic background. Schjeldahl comes out of poetry; Hughes is self-taught. At any rate, her implication that the situation would be better somehow if programs such as the one she mentioned were available is shaky, at best.

It’s not that artists can’t be intelligent writers, or write accurate and meaningful pieces on a show such as “10 Miami Artists,” even if they are completely over the bitterness of not being chosen for the show. But if they trash said exhibit, who isn’t going to shrug off their negative outlook on jealousy?

This shoe fits, so I'll wear it - I apologize to Ms. Sohon if this wasn't somehow directed at me. This is wrong on two counts: One, I didn't trash this show. I praised the work of Young and Handforth, and gave praise mixed with criticism to Bas. Two, this tendency to respond to criticism by attacking the character of the critic is an ad hominem fallacy that prompted the "address the writing, not the writer" guideline on this site. This is weak-minded, but here in Miami, ubiquitous: the comment from Haters and this collossolly asinine remark from Cisco fall into this category.

The analysis will be junked immediately.

Passive voice again. Who will junk my analysis immediately? Sohon is welcome to, but someone else was just over at my house, reading this and nodding her head in the affirmative. And she's younger than me by far. So Sohon's welcome to speak for herself.

Get Out the Way.

No. Get me out of the way. Go ahead - try.

Haters: good thing there's not much danger of that happening.

Manute: What?

Cisco: see above.

Harlan: Totally agree. I don't know if it will apparent to a few of our other commenters today, but you'll notice that I'm coming out against hyperbole above.

17.

Harlan Erskine

June 3, 2005, 1:31 AM

maybe they raise a good point, but with a juvenile delivery. I only a fool would publicly criticize their patron.

18.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 1:40 AM

OK, ok, so I can't keep "legendary" to its original, useful use, but you have to admit you can't turn on the TV or radio or read a magazine without seeing it overused ten times. Besides Triff was referring to something that is just way too contermporary and present even for the looser usage.

The things we are taking about are matters of intelligence and chacracter, not age. There's no virtue in being young or old or inbetween. That's dumb.

19.

alyssa fogleman

June 3, 2005, 2:05 AM

old pro:

i am (not) sorry to point this out:

what you have attributed to me (and attributed to my selfish viewpoint to paraphrase) - see yr post, #11 - was actually an excerpt from an article by Kerri Sohn (no Sohon, though I seemed to start a trend - see Franklin's more correct attributions) that was published in the Biscayne Blvd Times today.

Not only did I lead in by saying it was an excerpt, but it was the first post of today.

Shouldn't you at least read what I posted (and what has been posted before) before jettisoning my thoughts (or overlooked excerpts from local publications) off to ageism?

Thanks.

20.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 2:13 AM

The author's name is K. Lee Sohn. I was copying Alyssa, but the fault is mine - I should have checked it. My apologies.

21.

alyssa

June 3, 2005, 2:19 AM

again, here is the link to the article:

http://www.biscayneboulevard.com/stories/june05/template.php?page=culture_void

between today's article and this one, previously mentioned, but, surprise, not discussed) that was published recently in Ignore Magazine:

http://ignoremagazine.com/features/hernan/index.html

I feel that this delivers invaluable, unbiased insight into The Rubells and their relationship with Miami's art world, along with Snitzer.

No Bas Boys, No Haters, just thorough art writing from general unknowns, to be used in defense of citings like "art criticism is dying." No, art criticism (esp in Miami) just needs new blood, that's all, and here it is I feel.

22.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 2:24 AM

Sorry, Alyssa, it was not at all clear. In any event I see no reason to change what I said, only to redirect it.

23.

Jack

June 3, 2005, 2:28 AM

Skip (#1), I neglected to say that I didn't comment on Triff's review of the Julie Kahn show because I didn't see that show, though it sounds very much worth seeing.

24.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 3:35 AM

"General unknowns"? Omar wrote more articles than I did for Street by a factor of three. And you can feel cynical about my not discussing Ignore here, but I was laying off of the new venture of my former colleague until it had time to find its legs. I can tell from the article URL that they're kind of winging it. Sometimes you have to.

Ms. Sohn's article is a mess. She has haughty vituperation down, so I won't write her off yet - a critic can go a surprisingly long way on haughty vituperation. I speak from experience. She needs to work on structure, big time - particularly, the paragraphs seem aimlessly linked, she makes unpalatable leaps of logic -

Not only does the selection appear a bit skewed, but work by Bas and Fisher were everywhere – erotic nature scenes and waif-like boys scorched in your retina barely leaving room for anything else. Come on, Fisher and Bas are everywhere: Miami, New York, London, etc, etc.

- and she loses the subject several times -

Younger artists are becoming like pop-stars in Miami and around the world. This may account for the decreased visibility of more developed, quality artworks, which is sort of like the Rubell exhibit.

- but I've seen worse. The Arts Journal citation was good, and she conveys urgency and energy. She'd be a decent blogger. In fact, she ought to start a blog, because that daily practice really forces you to clean up your act. Again, voice of experience.

With apologies, local art criticism doesn't need new blood. It needs new brains. The rising tide would float all the boats, old and new. If I despair about Miami's future, it's over this point - if you sit down at a random table in a coffeeshop in Boston, for instance, it's not out of the question that the cute mamasita sitting next to you is analyzing the structure of a protein. We don't have that kind of intellectual firepower down here, and it shows whenever I threaten to barbecue the local sacred cows.

25.

DidntAskWouldntTell

June 3, 2005, 3:41 AM

To all, I strongly recommend seeing the Julie Kahn show. Personally i was blown away, incredibly well concieved and executed. The show had tongues a wagging on opening night and Locust wasn't even serving sushi (which was the big draw at their previous exhibit.)
Jack, sorry about the comment that you spoke positive about the review. After re-reading your comment it is clear that you were hoping to spark discussion and that is what you did. Good job.
Skip

26.

DidntAskWouldntTell

June 3, 2005, 3:49 AM

Franklin
As someone who has lived in Miami since I was 10 years old, I have come to realize that Miami will never have an intellectual scene as vibrant as NewYork/Boston or a music scene that would explode as did Seattle, Cleveland or Detroit. My theory is that the kids have too much to do here. They are not stuck in the basement with a guiitar or mom & dad's outdated video equipment while they wait out a snowstorm. In Miami if the kids have nothing else to do they can always go to the beach or hit their older brother up for some X. There is no need to develop creative instincts.

27.

interested

June 3, 2005, 3:57 AM

"Sometimes you have to wing it." - Franklin (#24)

Do tell.

Alyssa: I found those recommended articles to be startlingly similar in style and opinion (the parts about Snitzer seemed to have been mix-matched) if entertaining. I do think that Ignore Magazine has found its footing however. It is not merely as simplistic in execution as a blog and its local arts coverage since whenever it launched seems to be diverse, even if I'm not personally familar with many of the staff besides artist Reeve Schumacher. And Omar as Franklin mentioned has been around long enough to survive one publication's demise (The Street).

I do not think there is ever a case when one should wing it in regard to art criticism.

That said, kudos to today's ravers of the Kahn showing.

28.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 4:10 AM

Skip, I have a similar theory that median temperature and median IQ correlate inversely, at least in the US.

Interested - Yeah, Julie did a hell of a job.

I do think that Ignore Magazine has found its footing however.

Getting that third issue out is always a bitch. That's when the money, ideas, and energy start to get used up. Give them time. I have my fingers crossed for them.

29.

objextivity

June 3, 2005, 5:15 AM

speaking of ignore magazine and their rumored "third issue" troubles, one of their photographers is in New Times' The Bitch, umm, how can one put this, "passively eulogizing" objex art space. Sounds like a real class act. one wonders if she reflects the rest of that publication. "Humberto's (humberto guida of New Times) Coke Adventures" anyone? yikes.

30.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 5:17 AM

Seriously folks, how can you get so excited by this stuff? It isn't art criticism. It doesn't even pretend to be. It doesn't talk about art. It's just gossip. I don't think most of you have any idea what art criticism is. You never get any to read, I suppose.

31.

objextivity

June 3, 2005, 5:24 AM

umm....the possible reason for the decline of the gallery that put wynwood on everyone's map is beyond the realms of gossip. and this is miami, god forbid, another popular artist torn apart by drugs not be discussed because there's not a quote by Cezanne.

32.

objextivity

June 3, 2005, 5:27 AM

sorry, but i do think this is relevant to what both skip and franklin were discussing - too many drugs (aka recreational activities) and too much heat keeping them indoors (doing uncreative things). it's just a specific and very, very timely example.

33.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 5:34 AM

It's really juicy gossip, though.

I saw that piece, and I wasn't sure what to make of it. The Bitch didn't talk to Dustin, so it seemed totally one-sided. I never feel good about a space closing, even if I didn't get down with what Objex did a lot of the time. Years ago when they were on 5 Av. I saw Mark Mothersbaugh's work there and enjoyed it.

34.

nonartobject

June 3, 2005, 5:38 AM

Karen Genetta's web site

35.

nonartobject

June 3, 2005, 5:46 AM

from Karen Gentta's friendster profile, under the "about me:" heading...

Sex, Drugs, Photography and Rock n Roll....
___________________________________________________
from LOFT magazine-nov issue:

"A new generation of artists are forming a movement in the growing community of downtown's wynwood art and design district, boasting over 80 art galleries and museums, the setting is creative and underground. In the middle of this growing art phenomenon is young british photographer Karen Genetta, a resident artist of Objex Artspace and a respected party girl. Karen is unlike most photographers in the industry that are older and more commonly men. Setting new standards for my perception of the eye behind the vision, she greets me in a Sass & Bide dress and italian pumps baring her tattoos as she demonstrates how to be a chic uptown girl with downtown streetwise attitude that huddles in an international celebrity circle.
She held a beer in one hand and a glass of champagne in the other as she explained the family that is the Miami artist community; " we've all known eachother for years, we are all just a phone call away from executing any crazy project, i am lucky to have such talented crazy people around me always", humble words from such an up and coming artist ready to explode across the pages of magazines. Karen Genetta's images "What I eat for breakfast" and "Love is a killer" are currently displayed in a traveling group exhibition "Backyard Lovers", her images are romantic and violent compared to her flawless fashion editorials or experimental black and white processing. She is one of many photographers entering the realm of enhanced digital photography.
------------------------------------------------------------------
of course i dont even remember saying shit at the time HAHA!

36.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 5:51 AM

Okay, now I'm starting to feel tawdry and cheap. Let's leave it at that, Nonartobject.

37.

pensando

June 3, 2005, 5:55 AM

saw the show and was very disappointed, and whatz so great about hernan bas?
its more bad ripoffs of Karen Kilimnik work, and ironically the real ones are in the building!!!!!!!!!!!
what the world needs now is more painting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

38.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 7:46 AM

More painting and less gossip.

39.

Harlan Erskine

June 3, 2005, 8:24 AM

painting? I thought this was an "art blog" am I on the wrong web site? is this www.paintingblog.net?painting is not the only or highest art. Don't put painting on that high pedestal of high art because it was knocked down to equality. painting can be shit just like sculpture just like drawing and just like photography.

40.

stray cat

June 3, 2005, 12:07 PM

I don't think anyone can enjoy work of art with too many gossips.
there's too much farting here, it's smoke is tainting my vision...

41.

jordan

June 3, 2005, 2:26 PM

I'm not sure if Julie reads this or not, but her photos where brilliant. Plus she ls one of the best gifts that Miami has artistically. Everyone can learn something from her aesthetic and her humble jovial nature and honesty.
Great work regarding the exploitation of underprivilaged white farmer folks in Florida Julie!
I've allways admired your insight and interpretation of things.

42.

stray cat

June 3, 2005, 2:59 PM

I'm looking forward to the day when Franklin enters the Rubell Collection and be represented by Snitzer gallery...

43.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 3:14 PM

I suppose that nothing's impossible, Stray, but I continue to feel happy at Dorsch, and as for the Rubells, well, maybe they'll see my work at Margulies and decide they need some of their own.

On the other hand, you're talking to someone who once wrote a post criticizing a review that Elisa Turner wrote about a show I curated - and it was a positive review. I'm a little nuts.

44.

Jack

June 3, 2005, 3:36 PM

For what it's worth:

In my comment 15, second paragraph, the third line should have read:

"...What there IS is alternately vague..."

45.

Cisco

June 3, 2005, 4:43 PM

Some people are mortified that some other people are successful. Some people don't like it. They think they have the right to say it and say it. Be it. That will not take away the fact that the sucessful people continue being succcessful in spite of the crying and ranting. Cause effect. In the process the mortified people get more mortified. Cause effect, only better.

46.

Franklin

June 3, 2005, 5:38 PM

Thanks for sharing, Cisco.

You know, it's handy having people like Cisco come here and comment, because when I remark about kids not being able to write or Miamians generally having the intellectual powers of shredded wheat, it backs me up when we get appearances from a poster child for the epidemic.

47.

Jack

June 3, 2005, 6:08 PM

I'm not an artist. I'm not interested in being represented by Snitzer or any other dealer. I'm not interested in being in the Rubell collection or anybody else's. I'm not interested in being picked up by some art mag as "emerging talent," or being named "Best Miami Artist" by New Times. I'm not interested in catching the eye of Bonnie Clearwater or any other museum person. I AM interested in art, pure and simple--what I consider good art, that is. I'm in this for what I can get from the art, period.

The show of Miami artists now at the Rubell place is indeed "historic," just like absolutely any show in any known venue is, strictly speaking, part of the history of art in Miami. It is also, generally speaking, weak--the space or facility it occupies is more impressive than the work as such. In my previous "review" here (see "this past weekend" thread from 17 days ago, comment #1), I was too soft, or too diplomatic. Can other people have a radically different opinion? Certainly, and that's their business. But please, do me (and others) the courtesy of accepting the fact, or at least the possibility, that criticizing any given work reflects first and foremost how one feels about said work as art.

The "ulterior motive" card is awfully easy to play and awfully convenient to use, and it can be just another form of denial or evasion. Whoever claims, for instance, that Franklin is "just jealous" needs to do better. If Franklin's (or anybody's) stated opinion is perceived as wrong, then address or counter said opinion with an alternative argument about the work in question--don't attack the person and act like the matter is settled: it simply isn't.

48.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 7:18 PM

Yes, and please note, Cisco, that there is a difference between successful in the art market and successful as an artist, and that there is a long history that these things more often than not operate separately. When you make comments like you and others have made here about "success" and people's motives you really just look ignorant and ill-spirited. And it fouls the discussion.

Remember, if you will, that the Cisco Kid and his buddy Pancho, like Don Quixote and Pancho Sanza, as misdirected as they often were, went around helping people out of scrapes and doing good works. Live up to the name.

49.

Cisco Kid

June 3, 2005, 10:49 PM

Oldpro, Miami is not what you wish it to be no more. Get used to that.

50.

oldpro

June 3, 2005, 11:05 PM

What is that supposed to mean, Cisco? Are you telling me what I "wish"? How do you know what I "wish"?
React to what's been said and add something to the discussion or please just get lost.

51.

Jack

June 4, 2005, 12:47 AM

I don't believe Miami has ever been what Oldpro would wish it to be (he can correct me if I'm wrong).

52.

oldpro

June 4, 2005, 1:51 AM

yeah, it's not like it used to be some kind of art utopia.

I got used to it, but II don't have to like it.

53.

epic

June 4, 2005, 9:11 PM

Since when did Ignore Magazine have a third issue? They've only been online since May. Mind your posts.

54.

Franklin

June 4, 2005, 11:49 PM

Since never. My point about the third issue is that most new publishing efforts have trouble getting past it. Ignore is on its first issue, of course. Objexivity seems to have misinterpreted what I said.

Subscribe

Twitter @franklin_e

Instagram franklin.e

Offers

Other Projects

Legal

Design and content ©2003-2017 Franklin Einspruch except where otherwise noted