Previous: jordan massengale at tachmes (43)

Next: peter barrett at ingalls (8)

lynne golob gelfman at snitzer

Post #711 • January 18, 2006, 3:41 PM • 13 Comments

Snitzer Gallery harbors a single unmixed formalist, and is displaying her work through January 30th. Gelfman coaxes paint into a variety of textures using non-standard tools, and, in a recent development, spots the surfaces with with some bituminous color that gives them a definitive foreground. All the usual descriptors of successful color field painting apply: atmospheric, serious, playful-yet-controlled. But mostly I kept wishing to see them bigger. Nothing was going wrong with them except that their ambitions needed a stiff coffee; a greater area and a few spastic jitters in their technique would have helped them. They nevertheless achieved handsomeness, without a doubt, resembling raku glazes at times.




January 18, 2006, 4:43 PM

Safe Art.



January 18, 2006, 5:58 PM

Simply cant tell without seing it in person. In the past I walked away uninspired and suspect it won't be much different. I'll try to go this weekend From the blog the top two look more einteresting than the yellow ones.



January 18, 2006, 6:20 PM

Yes, I agree. The top one is by far the best. the others are pretty inert.



January 18, 2006, 6:25 PM

I saw the show. Respectable, reasonably interesting work, but it feels a bit rote and impersonal, a bit mechanical--like something one could program a machine to generate after feeding it the different paints. Her use of color can be quirky or offbeat enough to intrigue, but she's no colorist. A little too reminiscent of Op art for my taste, though certainly more organic.



January 18, 2006, 11:23 PM

I haven't seen the show (been out of town!), but I probably should.

Then again, a dismissal from Jack should be taken particularly seriously with work like this, the likes of which he usuallly agrees with.



January 18, 2006, 11:56 PM

Alesh, believe it or not, I don't have a Pavlovian response to art.



January 19, 2006, 7:43 AM

I knew that the concept of liking art categorically would come up here sooner or later.

I would just like to reiterate that, like Jack, and like others on this blog who are regularly accused of only liking one "style", all I am interested in is art that looks good to me. It really does not matter what it is called. It is either good, bad or indifferent.


moustache anear

January 19, 2006, 9:15 AM

"You are either with us , or you are against us..."

You sound like that president of ours..



January 19, 2006, 9:35 AM

Moustache, instead of willfully caricaturing what Oldpro is saying, try contributing some original thought of your own.



January 19, 2006, 11:16 AM

Yes, Moustache, you are just off base here. No one here either said or implied "with us or against us". These things just seems to be in your head.

In any event, it is not something that can be fruitfully responded to. Why bother?



January 21, 2006, 8:46 AM

"You can always spot a well-informed man-his views are the same as yours."



January 21, 2006, 2:32 PM

You can spot an intelligent man, too, Chase.

His views, for or against, tend to be well-informed and thought out.



January 21, 2006, 3:20 PM

I saw the show yesterday, i walked away unimprezzeled, similar to what I expected. The blue picture above was best to my eyes , a small square picture on the same wall wasn't bad either.

i also saw Paula celman's show at miami international university, definitely worth seeing, small expressive paintings, some quite beautiful. It'll be up til Feb 1st



Other Projects


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