Previous: foretaste (4)

Next: must not make nada in spanish joke (16)

casa lin, pulse, cars and fish

Post #676 • December 3, 2005, 2:26 PM • 11 Comments

Another Artblog.net Publication.

Comment

1.

Jack

December 3, 2005, 6:55 PM

OK, I broke down and coughed up the $10 to see Pulse. I shouldn't have, if only because potential customers should never have to pay to see the merchandise, but it did turn out to be the best of the satellite fairs. Still, that's not necessarily saying much.

NADA (with few exceptions) was like a bad joke (if I'd paid $10 to see it, I would have had to shoot myself). It appears to have been based on the appealing but delusional concept that anything and everything will fly just because you want it to--it won't; trust me.

Aqua was esssentially a non-claustrophobic, open-courtyard version of Scope. The ambience, helped by perfect weather, initially seduced me, but I was ultimately bored by the predictability and relative sameness of much of the work. Also, the whole hotel-room-cum-gallery business is pretty trite by now, and it may make weak work look even flimsier.

Maybe more on Pulse later. Now I'm off to see Real Painting.

2.

Jack

December 4, 2005, 12:04 AM

For those who plan to see Pulse on Sunday, the following are pieces I found of interest to one degree or another (in no particular order):

-Jacques Villegle collage @ Pavel Zoubok Gallery

-Lance Letscher collage @ Richard Levy Gallery

-Larry Bemm @ Marcia Wood Gallery (the works on paper, which are
better than his canvas pieces)

-Angelika Rinnhofer photo "Old Master" portraits @ Paul Kopeikin Gallery

-Franz Kline mixed media on paper (1940s) @ Galerie Stefan Roepke

-Robert Polidori photo (Amman #1) @ Nicholas Metivier Gallery

-Motherwell etchings with collage (set of 4) @ Nicholas Metivier Gallery

3.

onesock

December 4, 2005, 2:09 AM

It appears to have been based on the appealing but delusional concept that anything and everything will fly just because you want it to--it won't; trust me.

Im sorry, I would have to dissagree with this statement. I love to see artists using materials in ways I never thought of. That, for me, is exciting, fresh and alive. DId I dig everythng at NADA, AB, Scope and there rest? No. of course not. But in general, the level of inventiveness is astonishing. I am a promiscuous art lover. I was very happy to see at Art Basel Paul Feeley, Mary Heilman, Ray Johnson, Marcel Broodthaers and other old favs. But I really love discovering how newer artists' are exploring materials and processes. I really took my time to look (there is so much) and there were things that could have been easily missed for example, did anyone see the glass company installation with the fake mirror? DId anyone see the container at Positions with Ariel Orozco's works. For me, these were fantastic experiences.

And if you notice , I did not say you were wrong, I simply said I disagree with you.

4.

mek

December 4, 2005, 7:58 AM

bravo onesock. there is definately crap out there, but there are also gems. one can't just give everything a blanket statement. i am very into material usage as well. which i saw a lot of so i am happy. i hope you contribute more, onesock.

5.

Jack

December 4, 2005, 9:35 AM

Onesock, the statement you quote was not referring to any particular use of materials or processes, only to quality of end results as perceived by me. My assesment of NADA was shared by others, as Franklin has indicated in his review of that fair, though you may obviously disagree with it.

6.

mek

December 4, 2005, 10:03 AM

jack, to disagree is healthy.

enjoy your day.

7.

Jack

December 4, 2005, 10:25 AM

I agree with you, mek. I disagree all the time. Somebody has to.

8.

Marc Country

December 4, 2005, 1:12 PM

It appears to have been based on the appealing but delusional concept that anything and everything will fly just because you want it to--it won't; trust me.

Im sorry, I would have to dissagree with this statement.


I'm not clear on what onesock is disagreeing with here.

Is it the idea that NADA appears to be based on this concept, "that anything will fly", or that such a concept, while perhaps "appealing", is "delusional"?

The rest of the post about 'inventive use of materials and processes' doesn't really explain what it is in the statement that is being disagreed with.

Aqua, Pulse, Scope... are these art fairs, or toiletries from the back of my medicine cabinet?

9.

oldpro

December 4, 2005, 2:34 PM

Good point, Marc, and the toiletries comment is appropriate and funny.

10.

Jack

December 4, 2005, 6:46 PM

Marc, this is the art biz, which in many ways is no different from the fashion industry. For many people whose interest in it is primarily commercial, it's essentially another branch of the luxury goods market. A great number of the most sought-after customers, who tend to be de cierta edad, actively want or need to feel hip, breezy, and young. The people after their business actively cater to these desires.

11.

Marc Country

December 5, 2005, 3:34 PM

Oh, I see... well, maybe Franklin should run a contest to name next year's satellite shows...

How about Flash! or Razor! Or, um... Ninja!


Sooo cool.

Subscribe

@franklin_e

franklin.e

Offers

Other Projects

Legal

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