MSB brainstorming

05 January 2014

The Chicago Art Fair, Artist Project, Sharkstock: A Quasi-Chronological Report in Name-Dropping Fragments

First published May 10, 2007


shark_brandl_logo.jpg

My adventures in Artropolis. With far too many pictures of myself.
I got back Tuesday to Switzerland after my 6 day extravaganza in Chicago, but slept through the rest of the day. I had a fabulous time and will try to extol it in surges, as recollections and considerations come to my mind.

My return to Chicago after 17 years began as I flew in Wednesday the 25th and was picked up by The Shark, Wesley Kimler, at the Damen stop. Swiss airlines got me and my surreptitiously imported artwork (in a 6-foot long “undiscussed,” yet X-rayed, roll) safely from Zurich to Chicago. It was an enjoyable flight in which I, surprisingly, sat next to one, and behind two, artworld denizens who are on the jury to decide which artists from the Swiss city of Lucerne get the use of a Chicago live-in studio, in four month blocks each. The man with whom I talked the most is named Beat Stalder. He is an interior / exhibition designer and architect with the Transportation Museum in Switzerland as well as a curator-juror-type. We discussed many things and he even agreed with my concerns about the Consensoriat , in which both he and I are ever-so-slightly involved as well, as juror and critic. We also discussed a certain curator from Lucerne and St. Gallen who earlier had supported my work and written about me, yet who currently is peeved with me, according to reports, due to my published, open questioning of the behind-the-scenes rigging of a regional group exhibition, wherein I performed that most heinous of crimes in Switzerland and the artworld — I actually stated out loud something everyone knows and deplores, yet “one” is supposed to be clued-up enough to never say and “one” is to pretend that it is not true. Yessir masser. Brav ist besser. Well-behaved artist vassals. According to my new acquaintance, this person “is so” and will get over it. I will give various names and numbers of Chicago artists to Stalder, and he will then pass them on to the artists coming to Chicago. Be on the look out for them and welcome them into your midst. It will be good for them and good for Chicagoans to get some international contacts directly and outside the regularly controlled conduits.

Immediately I had some great discussion with The Shark and was overwhelmed by his immense studio, The Sharkpit. I was also thrilled to almost immediately meet David Roth, the other chief Sharkforum contributor, webmaster, sculptor and rock musician, as well as Wesley’s pal the genius musician Nicholas Tremulis, whose music I have always been a fan of since ever his Island Records days. And I met the stunning and talented jazz singer Stephanie Browning, who knocked ‘em dead later in the week at Sharkstock. Amazing voice and vocal expressiveness. Wesley’s place sure is a-hoppin’.

The next day, Thursday morning, I hung my show, as I couldn’t do it Wednesday, since the Merchandise Mart didn’t have evening set-up hours, something they’ll need to address next time. Because Wesley was up all night every night getting the Sharkpit ready for Sharkstock 2, he couldn’t get going early Thursday. However, I was lucky that Paul Klein, retranslated into Magnus Grossartig by me, jumped to the rescue. This ex-gallerist, art expert, collector and now art organizer is also the author of regular art reviews at his site, The Art Letter. He is a veteran of many art hangings (we should really modernize to lethal injection) and we got a complicated booth-hanging done rather quickly. Thanks! Afterwards, he and I rushed through the entire show, the “main show” that is, Art Chicago. Paul wrote about it here. I agree with his article wholeheartedly, especially the line that “ArtChicago in particular and Artropolis in general are fantastic.” Some quick thoughts in particular follow.

magnus.jpg
Klein Cover Painting by me

I go to The Basel Art Fair (in Basel, Switzerland) every year. I have been to various of the other smaller fairs throughout Europe. I was much more than pleasantly surprised by Art Chicago. The hallways were wide, the booths had ample independence. There were a few “repeating” artists as there are every year and in every fair — one of the hobbies of regular fair-goers is to try to spot this celebrity-of-the-fair and compare notes with others about who they saw a lot of, what stuck out as “everywhere.” Strangely enough it appeared to be Robert Motherwell, who I have never seen in this role before, and Jim Dine. The Motherwell’s were a bit weak for him, but good. Dine, who is abhorred in Europe (they are trying to rewrite Pop so that Warhol, Germans and French becomes the stars), is, as always either very good (the Robes) or very bad (the Cubist Venuses).

Beyond this little visual game though, something far more important stuck out to my eye. The galleries were showing work primarily by renowned artists, top o’ the pops if you will, yet the whole thing was clearly of very high quality and far, far less consensus-trendy than Basel usually is. I was delighted. The choices were superb within the realm of the possible (although impossible choices would indeed be a delight to dream of). I mean this in a positive sense. Often at Basel I get the sense that the Consensoriat has dictated the shopping list, and it is highly populated with the flavor of the week. I did NOT feel so in Chicago. There was even a high incidence of the Consensoriat’s abused step-child, painting. And good painting, from Conceptual Painting (David Row), New Painting (a la David Reed) to directions as yet unnamed. Amazing. What I wouldn’t have given for a couple of booths filled with only Reed, Mary Heilmann, Wesley Kimler, Mark Francis, Marianna Levant, Jeff Zimmerman and, well, me .

msb_caf_sm_caf.jpg
Me in front of a painting shown at the fair

Bridge was crowded, it contained a surfeit of over-packed galleries, but revealed a wealth of stimulating art. In general, I saw, perhaps, too many “cute ideas” in place of deep commitment, but that’s the artworld nowadays and the Bridge galleries had much to appreciate outside that grumble. I would advise allotting more space to each gallery and wider aisles next year, nonetheless. I spent some time talking to the people at Cynthia Corbett Gallery from London. They showed a wide variety of artists from a very enjoyable, decorative, postmodern painter of poured-resin works, Klari Reis, to a quasi-traditional painter H. Craig Hanna (he can draw) to a sculptor of small-scale, jokey variations on Michelangelo’s David, Lois Carson. Nice range. Additionally, I touched base with Brook Dorsch of Dorsch Gallery from Miami, Florida. He showed many works of very high quality which I enjoyed — his website reveals even more. (He says Basel-Miami enlivens the city temporarily, but they still need to do considerable work and can’t seem to secure decent critical coverage for any length of time; sound familiar?) Michael Workman and his crew are doing an admirable job with these Bridge Fairs, they deserve high praise and support. And Workman survived the Art War. Nah-nah-na-nah-nah. I would like to see Bridge AND Version at the Basel Art Fair!

three_sharks.jpg
Three of the Sharkpack: Wesley, the Shark center; Mark, the EuroShark left; and David, Shark Ed(itor) right. Photo courtesy Hampton and Rusty.

Late that night, the whole Shark Squad went to the Art Chicago Opening, where we met MCA Curator Lynne Warren and many other folks. (It was great to talk to Lynne again after so many years. She is so positive and independent as a thinker. She took one of my Viewers for the MCA's muliple collection. Now I just need to get her to let me make an installation of Panels or Covers for the MCA in which I "honor and/or abuse" Chicago!) I was chatting away with so many, that I got to the Artist Project Opening, which overlapped the Art Chicago one, 10 minutes late. An explosion of talking to and showing work to visitors, collectors, old friends, art space directors, critics and so on began. It did not end for even one minute until after the whole week was finished on Monday afternoon. I had written to tons of people, either ones I had not seen for years, or ones who had contacted me at different times and expressed interest in seeing some work, or simply people who appeal to me. The largest percent came a-visiting. From old friends like ex-best-installation-artist-ever, and now beekeeper, Michael Paha, to Agriculture-and-Culture Wormfarm director Donna Neuwirth, from Milwaukee/Mexico artist Raoul Deal to art theorist extraordinaire James Elkins, from critic Susan Snodgrass to critic, teacher and my ex-editor Michael Bonesteel, from Collectors (wishing to remain anonymous) to Curators (wishing to remain unnamed here), from The Shark to Tony Fitzpatrick, ... including Rock and Roll Stars Chloe Orwell and Brad Elvis (The Handcuffs) , The Sun-Times and Art in America’s Kevin Nance, ...

Who else did I meet? Tons o’ folks. Here’s an orgy of self-indulgent name-dropping. Tonya Pyatt and Bob O’Connell of Architrouve , (GREAT catalogue essay for Tony F, by the way, Lynne Warren), (Bob and Tonya struck me as singularly dedicated to art, get to their place); Adam Baumgold of his own NYC gallery, Bob Horn and Craig Anderson of the resurfaced NAB Gallery ; my old pal and ex-roomie Bill Siegel who co-directed the Oscar nominated documentary on the Weather Underground ; ex-college-roommates, lawyer Bob Carrillo, art historian and framer Marcos Rivera and astute social critic and concrete finisher Jeff Piediscalzi; CarolAnn Brown of the Michigan City Indiana Lubeznick Center for the Arts ; James Boeckman, sometime Sharkforum contributor and painter; Dawoud Bey, a great photographer with an upcoming new book titled Class Pictures (this artist’s works are brilliant, get his book); old pals who have a small collection of my art, David and Teri Ozawa; ex-co-worker at a record store David Ash; designer and comic artist Gabriel Chu Usadel, to whom I taught superhero drawing when he was a kid, and his parents Morgen and Chu Usadel (Morgen was a boss of mine at a record store back in the vinyl days, the man from whom I learned the most about music ever); Kevin Freitas of Abel Joseph Gallery and Art as Authority ; my ex-“sometimes”-boss at the Field Museum and the MCA, Geoff Grove; various Chicago artists such as Olga Stefan of the CAC ; (thanks to all who came up to encourage me on my theoretical articles for Sharkforum and Bad At Sports — does anybody read me at Art in America?) some people from the Chicago Printmakers Collaborative Julie Rodrigues Widholm, an Assistant Curator at the MCA; artist Ricardo Manuel Diaz a Cuban-Chicagoan (props to another ex-pat who married in to a strange culture); my ex- grad school advisor Harold Gregor , one of the few professors who taught art history and is also a remarkable and well-known painter; two accomplished painters, Vicki Briggs and Molly Briggs, who are also the widow daughter of the most amazing art professor I have ever met, the deceased and completely missed C.W. Briggs; ex-school-mate, medical doctor, guitar builder and collector of my art, Dr. Dan Brown (sometimes known as “Dr. Dan Bro7wn,” the seven being “silent”) ... (no he didn’t do the da Vinci thing); who hung out with me all night and wound up at Sharkstock 2 too; Erik McKissack, from Nashville to Chicago; Dayton Castleman , a sculptor and fellow CIVA member; James Renier , a fellow artist-usually-living-abroad and great discussion cohort; William Butler , the director the Contemporary Art Center in Peoria (and also a talented artist intrigued with comics), a location where I will be showing in the future and which was founded co-founded by Butler and the remarkable Preston Jackson my old pal and some-time collaborator, the author and previous comic book author (Dr. Strange, the first computer comic and more), Peter B. Gillis, who blogged about our meeting here ; ...

And as God knows, many many more, who I will abuse myself for not mentioning here as soon as I post this piece.

Each morning I squeezed something in before the booth hours began. One morning I was treated to a visit to the Lisa Boyle Gallery , which is featuring new sculpture by Jon Rajkovich. The works are charmingly capricious while also being formally pleasing, uniting excellent craftsmanship with aspects of purposeful incompletion. Lisa has a fine gallery and should be supported and reviewed regularly (take note Chicago critics), as should all the exciting new venues in the city. Boyle also was generous enough to take me into the adjacent gallery, Scott Speh’s Western Exhibitions, . He was exhibiting Dutes Miller and Stan Schellabarger, as well as Vincent Como. The book-works in particular were exceptional. According to Lisa, and what I have found on the web, Speh has an excellent record of exhibiting local artists. Another gallerist to applaud. I hereby request Bad At Sports to be nicer to him.

boyle_art.jpg
Rajkovich piece at Lisa Boyle’s

I got several exciting visits even after the show was really closed and I was rushing, with the help of Bill Dolan, to get my booth down so that I could sprint off to jump into the Handcuff’s Chloe’s car to catch my Switzerland-bound plane. These included Edith Altman. She is a excellent artist who, it should be noted in the history books, is the first real installation artist in Chicago and one of the first Conceptual artists in the city (together with Phil Berkman and Buzz Spector). (Also let it be noted that I began my art career as a Conceptual Artist in Chicago, thus was a late member of this small coterie or even in wave number two, thus the Neo-Con artists who often now claim to be “the first wave” are actually number 3.) Altman has a absorbing book about her work made in conjunction with a series of shows in Germany. It is titled Retrospective, is published by the Lindenau-Museum in Altenburg, Germany, is in both English and German and I hope to write more about it in the future. Check it out. She needs to be rediscovered “at home” in a more resolute manner.

New Insight had some fine works of art, but was rather classist, as Amanda Browder and her Team called the symposium (not New Insights) at Bad At Sports. New Insight featured MFA students from primarily private or similarly expensive art schools. Furthermore, no matter what the pre-publicity maintains, it was undeniably commercial — which I do not always find deplorable; (why do those who live on selling themselves for grant money always condemn those who sell objects? If anything the former is more hypocritical than the later). Nevertheless, New Insight’s mere presence in the art fair furthers the ageist, get-them-whores-ever-younger attitudes of the current artworld power pimps. Like the shop windows in Amsterdam, young meat is offered for the snapping-up. That’s commercial in the worst sense, whether you directly take money or not. Not bad art though. I rather enjoyed most of it.

Notably, I also finally got to meet the Bad At Sports radio podcast people in the flesh: Richard Holland, Duncan MacKenzie, Amanda Browder, Christopher Hudgens, Kathryn Born. And Amanda’s mom Dolly, who is cute and friendly. So, leave her alone yous guys! The BAStards were as charming and entertaining as I suspected. I wish I had Richard’s voice (but not his job), Amanda’s laugh, and Duncan’s wit (but not his hair — just kidding, he looked great). I look forward to working with them in the future as their Central European Bureau. They have opened up a whole new area of art reporting in Chicago with a style all their own.

(A little promotion in an aside: Amanda still has a show up at Gallery 400 till June 2nd. And Duncan has work up in the show The Adventurous Type at the Hyde Park Art Center until May 13th.

Duncan_hpac.gif
Duncan MacKenzie installation

Thanks to BASer Mike Benedetto , of the famous movie mini-reviews, for the reminder.)



brandl_booth_unscharf2.jpg
An out-of-focus photo of me in my booth

lennon_superman_bild.jpg
The John Lennon and Superman painting by me in my booth

brandl_covers_explosion.jpg
Some of my Covers works

The interaction among the Artist Project artists was exemplarily congenial and supportive. We watched each other’s booths when needed, discussed art as much as the constant stream of viewers, chatting and selling allowed, and looked closely at one another’s art. I was pleased to be near several artists who are or became close friends and whose art I value.

marianna_levant.jpg
A painting by Marianna Levant

One of my favorites was the amazing, young painter Marianna Levant who bears watching; the sophisticated and powerful photographer Sandro Miller was next door to me, soliciting oohs, aahs and more surprised exclamations;

sandro_miller_booth2.JPG
Sandro miller in front of both Dolan’s booth (left) and his own (right)

William Dolan , a frequent on-line discussion partner who paints evocative, realistic images of Chicago buildings that encapsulate my perception of them (as well as having created a Grammy-nominated CD cover which I love for The Road to Bliss by the Cathy Richardson Band);

bill_dolan_booth.JPG
Bill Dolan in his booth

sculptor Mike Bauer whose works I have admired since I was an undergrad; Paul Nudd , who creatively mixes comics and fine art in a fashion completely unique to him and different from my own; Jeff Zimmermann ,

jzimmapparel.jpg
Zimmermann’s mural at the entrance to the show

the painter of the vast, inspiring mural outside the Apparel Center at the entrance to the Artist Project, was a major discovery, ... he is a friendly personal, very Chicago in the best ways, and a great painter with striking paintings including a small one of a much-used softball which I covet — we discussed showing some of our room-encompassing painting-installations together and I hope it comes to pass;

jeff_zimmerman2.JPG
Jeff Zimmermann in his booth

zimmerman_softball2.JPG
Zimmermann’s great softball painting

Rusty Scruby came all the way from Texas, due to his interaction with the Chicago artscene via internet,... he used a combination of his cut-and-altered photographs to transform his booth into an impressive installation; Michael Pajon’s small prints are jewels, reflecting regional imagery but worthy of international interest; Elizabeth Buchanan was in the booth next to mine, but we were so busy we hardly talked... her symmetrically mirrored photos are straight-forward in their technique (no silly photoshopping), yet strange and alluring; Jackie Kazarian not only creates expressionistic, yet postmodern, paintings and “wallpaper” works (which would make a beautiful huge installation), but took the time to videotape all of us other Artist Project artists;

marianna_levant_jackie_interview2.JPG
Kazarian video-taping Levant

I wanted to discuss far more in depth with painter Ted Stanuga but we kept getting pulled back to our booths for viewers and buyers (a good thing!), check out his haptically anti-Calvinist works sometime; likewise, I only got to speak to photographer and painter Miguel Cortez , one of the founders of Polvo, for mere minutes, but enjoyed his crisp, linear painting;

...and there were many more, many of whom should become active Sharkpack members.

While about 80 percent of this “indy”-show-within-a-show was first-rate, I feel the Artist Project needs to increase quality somewhat, yet without falling into Consensus hands. A challenging endeavor. How? ... Allow for some groups of artists perhaps? Include a variety of “indy” artists, including such stars as Wesley Kimler or Tony Fitzpatrick too? Include the Artist Project subsection on the main floor? I’m not certain what I mean, but will try to delve into the issue in a future article. I DO, nevertheless, suggest including something of this sort in every future Art Chicago, and extending it to the Armory and , through Volta perhaps, to Basel and elsewhere. Great idea Mart People! And wonderfully organized --- thanks again to Kathleen Hogan and Chris Kennedy and crew.

I sold amazingly well. I had come primarily for the Shark and Bad At Sports interaction, but was pleasantly surprised by this turn of events, to say the least. This agreeable experience makes me desire an extensive show of my art in Chicago, including a Panels installation and paintings on canvas, both of which I was unable to bring this time.

The big “news” item was, of course, the Mart’s purchase of both The Armory Show And Volta. Everyone was buzzing with conjecture. As I mentioned on the BAS radio podcast, I am a regular attendee (and sometimes exhibited artist at) of the King of the Commercial Art Fairs, Basel (in Basel) and many other European art fairs. After seeing how completely organized the Mart was in Chicago and what their impetus and openness to dialogue did for Chicago, I laud this takeover. About 6 months ago, all over the artworld there was talk that Art Chicago under the Mart, and with it’s creative additions like the Artist Project, Bridge, Sharkstock, etc., could perhaps rival Frieze or Berlin. Well, with it’s success and the purchase of the Armory Show and Volta, they have leap-frogged ahead and will be in a position to challenge Bale-Basel / Basel-Miami,. Many European gallerists mentioned to me that they would rather go to Chicago than Miami, but hadn’t trusted it in recent years. If the Mart stay creative and open to improvements, as they suggested in such actions as interviewing each of us individual after the fair and by courting both the academic consensus artworld and supporting the far more creative Chicago artworld outside it (such as the Sharks), they can serve as a springboard for a whole new era in the Chicago artscene. An international and self-reliant one at last? The Sensation show, Damien Hirsch and Frieze did this for London, the Berlin show still needs work but is doing so for that city. Chicago can easily become as renowned as LA or London or Berlin. NYC will stay king, but the position of Archduke is still open to contention.

Chicago is on its way. I greatly disagree with New York writer Brian Sholis’s perceptions of Art Chicago posted on the Artforum website. If may be so bold as to read between the lines, I find him justly afraid of a potentially powerful Chicago, both Fair and City. After all, look at what the Frieze Art Fair just did for London (a “hostile take-over” as Jerry Salz called it). Sholis also attended, in short, all the wrong functions, seeing only the still “official” (and academically lethargic) Chicago Consensus Artworld. I missed many of the teas and brunches he frequented due to principally being in my Artist Project booth, true, but perhaps that was for the best. I AM sorry I missed most of Version. Next year guys and gals! It is a great idea and a fine bunch of people. It sounded like so much FUN on the BAS podcast!

Sharkstock 2 was marvelous. It appears to have had some 1500 + party attendees (I was up on the scaffolding counting for a while for fun.) Wesley cleaned and organized for days beforehand, lit some of his simply masterful huge paintings as well as exhibited sculptures by David Roth, small paintings by Drew Beatty, an installation by Ursula Sokolowska and two large paintings on paper by me.

shark1.jpg
Portrait and a Character: The Shark, a painting of Kimler by me which was shown at the Sharkpit

The crowd laughed and talked and danced. I saw people ranging from the ages of 68 to 17. From famous to unknown. All having a great time. I had forgotten how cheerfully relaxed and unconstrained artworld people in Chicago (and most of the US) can be. It was a great antidote to Switzerland, especially the Eastern part, where the artists tend to resemble yuppie businesspeople and stand in small groups, smoking broodily instead of talking and seldom introducing one another or themselves. In the Sharkpit, I met hordes of interesting artists, musicians, media, curators and others. It was fun and therapeutically liberating. Truly a delight.

handcuffs.jpg
The Handcuffs

brandl_rocking.jpg
Me in the process of either rocking or pontificating

mucca2.jpg
Mucca Pazza underway through the crowd

The musicians were great, including of course the marvelous Nick Tremulis ; the super rockin’ The Issues ; Mucca Pazza, a performance, music and visual delight ; and Stephanie Browning, she of the killer voice I mentioned above . I was personally thrilled that some old friends of mine, also mentioned above, The Handcuffs (Brad Elvis, Chloe Orwell and band) dropped in after their gig at Abbey’s. The played a short impromptu set after I begged them, which felt like a private concert for me with a small group of a couple of thousand friends. Chloe is a fabulous Rock singer and Brad is one of the most respected Rock drummers in the business, often being name-dropped by luminaries like Clem Burke of Blondie, Little Steven of Garage Rock Radio fame and the Sopranos, and others. I first saw Brad play when we were both about 17 years old and I have been a fan ever since. (Additionally, his mother bought the first oil painting I ever sold when I was also a teenager, a two-story high oil on panel of a woman, if I recall correctly.) Wesley was the perfect host, cruising slowly but surely through his gargantuan space greeting, chatting, discussing, a smile on his face the whole time (no kidding — his enemies might not believe it but he smiles a lot).

WK_sharkstock_host.jpg
The Shark hosting and happy

One short story here — concerning the fire near the Sharkpit. After we cleaned up a bit and both Wesley and I went to sleep at 6 am, I woke up shortly at 7 am when an unnamed person who was passed out on the couch woke up and left. There was no power, probably due to the fire, and I couldn’t find any light to go piss, so I went back to sleep. Then, an hour later I got up to get ready to go to my booth at The Artist Project. I look outside, and to my surprise it has changed from cold to summertime, AND the street is filled with cops and the fire dept. One fireman asks me if he can piss in our bathroom. After he’s finished, as I’m getting ready to go over a few streets so I can catch the cab I called (Wesley’s street was blocked off) he told me a bit of what happened. He said, and I quote, that some jerk (”joik” in Chicagoese, I love that accent) had bombed the place but they caught his ass on a surveillance camera and they had him. AND — the fire fighter was amazed I didn’t hear the explosion. If you were at Sharkstock, you wouldn’t be amazed. Anyway, I walked back in and shouted up to Wesley in his loft that I was leaving and that the house across the street was on fire. He shouted back groggily, “Lock the door.”

Living at Welsey’s dark, cavernous studio was remarkable. Something like existing in a Caravaggio or Velazquez painting, with spot-lit immense canvases and 6 friendly parrots. “Hey, I can’t find the coffee machine. “ — “It’s over next to the Las Meninas infanta!” The paintings are marvelous, especially in their surface facture and startlingly successful combination of representation and abstraction, color fields and intense paint handling. I intend to discuss them in a future article thoroughly at some point. Particularly as I feel Kimler has made some charged and significant discoveries for (post-) postmodern art and painting. These works have animated me like few other works I have seen for some time, re-invigorated me to continue on my own painting explorations concerning similar questions. This trip would have been a success simply due to seeing those works live, but fortunately my experience was even broader.

wk_drawings.jpg
Kimler drawing

wk_echo_park.jpg
A Kimler painting at 108 inches x 216 inches.

I was overjoyed to be a small part of this whole Artropolis event and I will now be regularly bloodying the waters of the Sharky Chicago artworld as your man-abroad. You can’t get rid of me again (unless you recreate that dim-witted, scheming, academic Neo-Con take-over of the late 80s again).

Chicago IS on its way. With a scene that is no longer dominated by pre-chewed illustrations of the freeze-dried pablum force-fed by the Consensoriat. Keep on pushing. This new energy is due to people like Wesley Kimler, Tony Fitzpatrick, all the other Sharks like David Roth, the Bad At Sports people, Iconoduell, Paul Klein, Michael Workman, Chris Kennedy and his crew and many more. I thank them all.

(In yet another aside, I was pleased to be part of such a successful and well-organized event by Mr Kennedy for personal reasons. His father Robert F. Kennedy was the first politician in whose campaign I actively worked, at the tender young age of 9 together with my father Earl Brandl, who had campaigned for Jack Kennedy and others. Additionally, largely in imitation of JFK’s name, as well as FDR’s, I received my name, with my mother’s “maiden” family name as a middle name.)

What’s next for Chicago? MY advice at this point — go get more, much more, critical coverage. Get curators to show local work in equal amounts and as equally important as international work. Encourage the great curators like Lynne Warren. Court these new collectors (such as those who bought my work) and get them buying more Chicago art. Artists must visit one another, discuss, argue, join together and show. Everyone must support local galleries, like Lisa Boyle. Buy from them. Get reviewers to review them. Talk it up. Boosterism. Don’t stop positive criticism, but tell the world that you have arrived and they have to take notice. Break the back of the Consensoriat Clique by rolling over them. Get outside curators to visit the Real Art Scene, not the insipid consensus facsimile of one. You’ve got a scene. One to rival London and Los Angeles and Berlin. Hype it. Let it be known. Utilize the momentum the Mart has given you and the quality your artists have and the energy your galleries have to build the other elements (like the weak critical and curatorial possibilities). Stop trying to “find” Chicago art. It is THERE. This outside visitor saw it.

Remember, you don’t “find” yourself, you build yourself.

brandl_business2.jpg
Me doing business in the booth

going_home_sign2.JPG
O’Hare, the sign to go home

home_plane2.jpg
My plane, see you soon again

Sharkforum Funnies 3

First published April 1, 2007

postobseq_cartoon.jpg

Guest Artist Raoul Deal: Mexico-Milwaukee-more, a Community Arts Shark

First published April 13, 2007

deal_install.jpg

I’m Raoul Deal, a visual artist: painter and so-called community arts creator. I went to the U of I at Urbana-Champaign as an undergrad, together with Mark Staff Brandl, with whom I also worked at the Field Museum of Natural History, and who has now gotten me involved here at Sharkforum.

My art has been very influenced by my active interaction with Latin American culture. I am married to Dinorah Marquez, a classical violist and educator from Mexico whom I met at a Puerto Rican motorcycle club party for the late mayor Harold Washington. We lived in Mexico with our daughter Gabriella for many years while I studied at the National University (UNAM/ENAP) and received my Masters, and later taught on the Art Faculty of the Universidad Veracruzana. We relocated to Milwaukee, of all places, and I now teach at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. I have the distinct honor of being Artist-in-Residence for UWM’s Cultures and Communities Program. In that capacity I develop and teach courses that address race and gender bias, and foster community art projects in the area, often with the participation of my students. I teach a variety of courses, but I really enjoy the very large American Art and Culture course that focuses on the social history of art, as well as a course called Multicultural Installation Art in which students propose installation art projects that are displayed in a variety of spaces throughout the city.

deal_drawing_gardner.jpg

My own art unites painting, sculpture, media, installation and collaborative community interaction. I sometimes exhibit in galleries, but I also work with site-specific community art pieces. I have worked as part of an arts development project in an Indigenous community in Mexico, and brought several of these artists to work with me in Milwaukee, I have also collaborated with Milwaukee’s Latino community in Walker’s Point, and with Walnut Way- one of the city’s oldest African American neighborhoods. As a community artist, I am often concerned with collaboration- experiences that enhance the possibility of mutual understanding. Sometimes projects become a microcosm of civic engagement. I hope I can bridge cultural gaps- to make it possible for a wider range of people to participate in the production and the appreciation of art.

While I often work with “artworld” references, I also use elements drawn from popular culture. I hope to engage people on a variety of different levels. I have learned that meaningful community involvement often entails more listening than talking. I do not want my public’s appreciation of my work to depend upon their knowledge of art history and/or contemporary theoretical discourse, but it might be enhanced by it. I hope I can spur their sense of wonder- make them think about the world in new way. Equally important, I want them to do the same for me. If I am not transformed by the experience of art-making, then I don’t want to do it.

My latest exhibitions were Confluencias- a collaborative multidisciplinary installation/performance with Cuban-born artist Leandro Soto at Walker’s Point Center for the Arts in Milwaukee, and a preview of large format (3’x5’) portrait drawings of Walnut Way seniors at the Zelazo Center at UWM. The Walnut Way project involves producing a series of pieces based on interviews with elders in one of the oldest African-American communities in Milwaukee Besides the Walnut Way project due for completion this June, I am again collaborating with Leandro Soto along with Nigerian dramatist Awam Ampka (NYU) and Rene Maldonado (co-founder of the Taller de Arte Joven de Tocoal in Tabasco, Mexico) on a large performance/installation piece for the Union Art Gallery in Milwaukee early next year. Finally, Brandl and I are working on a collaborative series of exhibitions in the near future.

raoul_deal_face.JPG

I plan to contribute to Sharkforum through occasional posts concerning a variety of personal creative interests such as Latin American art, socially engaged art, and art with meaningful community involvement. Since Chicago is relatively close to Milwaukee, I’ll also post my thoughts about exhibits and other art events here for those who might like to drive up and have a look.. Last week, I moderated an arts panel at UWM’s Latino Symposium that included folk artist Jose Chavez, and Columbia College art professor Mario Castillo. California muralist Judy Baca gave the keynote address and left many of us remembering that art does indeed have the power to change the way we see the world. More on that later…

Matthew Collings: a Great Art Critic on an Internet Radio-Cast

First published April 15, 2007

mattcollings_kimhill.jpg

Here is a link to a good interview-cum-discussion with Matthew Collings, one of my favorite “art commenters“ or critics. He can be vicious, flippant, London-boosterish, London-dismissive and cynical — yet is always interesting, far more intelligent than I think he wants to let on and very insightful about current art and the artworld.

Collings is an artworld star in his own right. In print, such as Modern Painters, on the radio and in various TV series about art. Furthermore, he is a successful abstract painter in his own right, disproving the oft-espoused claim that critics are failed artists. Perhaps more surprisingly still, he often, very often, doesn't actually like art now being made. Yet, he is passionate and fervent even in his distaste for the prevailing trends in post-modern art. It has been said of him that “with his eloquent and engaging approach to art criticism, he is one of the foremost art critics.” I agree. Get an enjoyable taste of him here on Radio New Zealand in an interview (about 40 minutes) with Kim Hill: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/national/sat/matthew_collings

04 January 2014

The Museum of Lost Wonder by Jeff Hoke

First published March 30, 2007

museum_wonder.jpg For those of you who either missed my Bad At Sports podcast contribution, or would rather actually read reviews than listen to them, here’s a post. I’m introducing a work of art in book form by former Chicago artist: The Museum of Lost Wonder by Jeff Hoke, now of California.

Jeff Hoke and I go back a long way. We studied art at the University of Illinois at Champaign together as undergraduates, we worked together at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, we even have done art collaboratively. At the Field Museum, or Dead Animal Zoo as it's employees fondly called it, we primarily created dioramas (such as the Eskimo sod and snow house), exhibitions (I did the Egypt Hall, Hoke much else). We worked with an exciting group of artists at that time including Raoul Deal, Michael Paha, Cameron Zebron, Bill Skodje and Jeff Wrona.

Hoke also created one of the best performance events I have ever seen: The Reluctant Tenants of Modernism; An Affectionate Look at Bourgeois Folk Art (A production in seven acts performed by their heirs). This evening-long piece, with exhibition as well, was presented in NAB Gallery circa 1983, and included marvelously entertaining and thought-provoking segments with a range of creators all planned by, directed by and created in collaboration with Hoke. It also included 3-D slides, a hilarious “travelogue” by now-actor John Judd, a smell performance and more.

Later Hoke and I, in addition to our own art careers where we often helped each other out, had a short-lived third career as a critical and humorous art pair called Staff 'n' Eddie. We stopped their activities when we felt they were becoming more popular as an artworld comedy team than a critical one. Or maybe because they were getting more famous than our "real" identities. If we indeed have real identities. Who knows. I went off to my life in Europe and elsewhere, Jeff became the senior exhibition designer at the Monterey Aquarium, which is more of a museum than a simple aquarium. We have stayed in touch, and Hoke visited me recently in Europe where he was assisting, in his free time, in the launch of a Museum of Alchemy in the Czech Republic, and was visiting various Wunderkammer, Cabinets of Curiosities, the origin of all museums.

Over the past 10 years and more, Hoke has been concentrating on the artwork I will discuss here, one merging myth, science and inspired speculation into a vast, yet imaginary personal museum, which is the title of his book, his website, his magnum opus: The Museum of Lost Wonder.

Yes, this is a book, but what a book, an artist's book, a wonder. This is an artwork of Hoke's that I wish I had collaborated on — but that would have been impossible, because this is all him. It has text, paintings, cartoons, diagrams, cut-and-paste models and more, all united into one mammoth gem, a banquet for the eye, mind, soul, and imagination — a strange amalgamation of science volume, esoteric textbook, graphic novel, painter's catalogue, psychological manual, do-it-yourself, think-for-yourself activity book and sprawling, gorgeous dream. Hoke's tome is encyclopedic, drawing on all the influences I have already mentioned, but also philosophy, astronomy, religion, biology, physics, psychology, quantum physics, and Tibetan Buddhism. That may sound scary or overwhelming — but the true strength of Hoke's book lies NOT only in its fascinating breadth, but in the clarity with which it all fits together — and the joy in discovery and wonder that arise in me every time I dip back into it.

The artist says that the curiosity cabinets of the 1600s inspired him, especially in their entertaining eclecticism. He wants to reinvigorate a thought process from before "science became a (dreary) belief system unto itself," when artist, alchemist, and scientist were one and the same, and the search for mystical experience included practical experiments.

The book is big, glossy and full color. Typical for Hoke, every single detail is immaculately well-thought out and executed — down to the trompe l'oeil illusions of scraps of paper appearing to float through the text , ones on which symbols of his own invention are drawn.

The book is structured around an imagined "accidental" tour through the museum, as experienced by a young boy who actually came into the edifice to use the toilet, but is drawn into the experience of his life. The tale is introduced in a wordless comic, then expands into a rich panorama of paintings and models and explanations as you turn each page, moving from one “exhibit hall” to another. This Gesamtkunstwerk of a book recreates the alchemical process of turning base metal into gold, and its actually spiritual goal, in the viewers' minds.

There are seven "exhibition halls," each its own chapter, in this museum accessible to everyone. Each is named for the stages of alchemical transformation from base matter to divinely-inspired knowledge. It begins with "Calcinatio" (Hall of Technology), continues with "Solutio" (Hall of Aquaria), "Coagulatio" (Zoological Garden),"Sublimatio" (The Observatory), "Mortificatio" (Mausoleum of History), "Separatio" (Science and Faith), and ending with "Conjunctio" (Gallery of the Arts). Each of these exhibit halls has its own Greek Muse presiding over it. Each Chapter-cum-Hall also ends with a removable, cut-and-paste paper model, such as a "Do-It-Yourself Model of the Universe" — each one an integral part of the work, but an artwork in and of itself as well.

The Museum of Lost Wonder has been called by one reviewer "an invitation into the imagination of a brilliant artist as well as a welcome back into your own imagination" and that it is. Moreover, it reminded me of the thrill --- the original sense of wonder —- I had in learning itself, and that this is based on asking exciting questions, even if, or perhaps even best if, you don't find one single answer.

I could go on and on, — in the book, uh — museum, you can meet Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes, Abraham Maslow and Sir Isaac Newton, you can play the "Heroic Vacation Game," you can thrill to the full-color 3-D (with red-green glasses) insert painting of a skull (only available as an insert if you buy it from his website), or to the beautifully rendered watercolors of Gnomen, the guide person, with which the book closes — but it suffices to say that you should buy this book and thereby own the best museum ever.

If "brick-and-mortar" museums were anywhere near Hoke's vision, I'd gladly return to working in them, especially if I could do so with Hoke and Raoul Deal once again. And above all if Hoke's "Gnomon," a cartoonish stick-figure who serves as a guide and mute mentor were the director.

In conclusion, this is indeed the preeminent work of art ex-Chicagoan Hoke has created, a culmination of at least 20 years of work and research, as far as I can see. It is a dazzling pièce de résistance. And one of the best works of art in any field or genre to have come from a Chicagoan, hell, from an American. A celebration of Wonder Re-Found.

The book is available in hardcover 176pp, at stores $49.95
cheaper on-line at Amazon or at Barnes and Noble: $39.96
ISBN: 1578633648
Publisher: Red Wheel/Weiser


His web site is www.lostwonder.org/
Where there is an interactive tour of the museum. It's a freebie people can enjoy ---something fun without buying the book.

There is a fine interview with the artist at Written Voices by life enhancement expert Allan Hunkin here.

A video spot for the book is at youtube where Jeff tells me he doing his best James Burke impersonation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_9XKJMZqZM

Some links to people and places mentioned in this blog:

The Museum of Lost Wonder / Jeff Hoke
UIUC School of Art
Field Museum of Natural History
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Raoul Deal
Michael Paha
Cameron Zebrun
Jeff Wrona
Staff 'n' Eddie
Wunderkammer
Museum of Alchemy
Plato
Aristotle
René Descartes
Abraham Maslow
Sir Issac Newton
James Burke

Liquid Rubens: Rubens in Las Vegas by David Reed

First published March 20, 2007

rubens_vegas_reed.jpg

Sharkforum is proud to present a post by the talented and influential New York painter, David Reed. He is a friend of mine and a regular email correspondent, as well as a painter about whom I have written and with whom I have discussed issues in art and especially in painting. Reed thoughts are always edifying and stirring, so when I heard that he has given a speech on Rubens for the exhibition in Las Vegas, of all places, of paintings by that miraculous Baroque artist, I asked him if he would write a version of his notes for Sharkforum. Reed was kind enough to do so, although he is busy with his work and with the exhibition titled High Times Hard Times New York Paintings 1967–1975, on which he served as advisor to the curator Katy Siegel, about which I posted earlier.


Liquid Rubens: Rubens in Las Vegas
by David Reed

When I was invited to give this talk about “Rubens and his Age, Masterpieces from the Hermitage Museum” now at the Guggenheim Museum in Las Vegas and my own work, I said “yes” because speaking about Rubens in Las Vegas seemed so perfect - I couldn’t resist. But many times since agreeing, I’ve thought that I was totally crazy. It’s foolish for any artist to compare his or her work to that of Rubens, an artist who many consider to be the greatest painter of all time. Any other painter is sure to come out looking bad in comparison. So my enthusiasm has gotten me into trouble and I hope that I can get out gracefully.

I also had another thought when I was invited to give this talk and it gave me courage. Recently Dave Hickey curated an exhibition at the Otis School of Art in Los Angeles called “Step into Liquid” that included my paintings. And I remembered a wonderful statement that he made about the paintings in the show when we spoke on the phone: he said that liquidity is the new depth.

Here’s a fuller quote from Dave from his essay for the show: “In post-war American abstraction, wet became the new deep. Paintings, of course, are neither wet nor deep. The idea of wetness became a primary metaphor for a whole manner of painting in which the fluidity of the surface provides the narrativity once provided by pictorial depth.”

This is a Rubens painting in the exhibition (Show slide) “The Union of Earth and Water”. It seems a demonstration of that thesis: water pouring out of a central void around which the painting is constructed.


Rubens_union.jpg


When I say that Peter Paul Rubens might be the greatest painter of all time, I think of this as a consensus view, yet there are many who would object. The classicist Johann Winckelmann thought Rubens’s forms “inharmonious”. John Ruskin thought his work “vulgar”. Peter Schjeldahl, an art writer of my generation and now the critic for the New Yorker, called Rubens “history’s chief painter’s painter” in a review last year of a Rubens drawing show at the Metropolitan Museum. But then Schjeldahl goes on to say that Rembrandt, Rubens’ contemporary living “barely ninety miles but a political world away in Protestant Amsterdam,” moved his work towards “the revelation of a new social reality that was as personal, dramatic, and profound as Rubens’s artificial paradise was unfelt and arbitrary.” In his review he goes on to say that: “Painters of my acquaintance dote on Rubens. They readily look past his subject matter to his form and his technique.” I’m hoping that tonight I can explain how a love of Rubens’ technique and formal invention can lead to an understanding of a certain kind of content in painting.

Out of curiosity, when I was a sophomore pre-med student at Reed College in Portland, Oregon, I took a class in painting. Looking at slides of old master paintings in the stifling, darkened Buckminster Fuller dome, I was bored and started to dose off. I wondered how I could stay awake as my teacher, the artist Bill Midgette, put up a slide of a painting by Rubens – a rape scene of men on horseback and nearly naked women. I thought to myself: “Oh God, this is terrible. I have nothing in common with this stuff.” Midgette spoke about the painting as an “intellectual conceit”, a phrase that I had never heard, and explained how the painting, along side the narrative story, was also a meditation on the changing of light from day to night. Suddenly I was alert. I had never understood until then how a visual image could, in this way, have intellectual content. Perhaps in that moment I became a painter.

The following summer, 1965, I made the then typical tour by a young American to Europe – by then I knew that I aspired to be a painter. I spent several days looking in the room in the Louvre of the Medici Cycle of paintings by Rubens. (Slides of the Medici Cycle of paintings by Rubens in Louvre.) By then I had read about how Delacroix and Cezanne had learned from those paintings. In his notebooks Delacroix wrote that “Rubens dominates, he overwhelms you with so much liberty and audacity” and he called Rubens “our Homer”. I had also studied Cézanne drawing of the naiads in Rubens’s paintings.

Rubens_medici1.jpeg

Rubens_medici2.jpeg

I had a theory in those days that I could see the paintings better if I was hungry and would starve myself before going to the museum. As I looked in a kind of daze, I soaked in the paintings. (Here I showed slides that I took on those visits.) Looking at the paintings, I felt immersed in the flowing color – as if I was swimming through color, immersed in the water portrayed at the bottom of some of the paintings. I was amazed by the drama, the rhetoric of the paintings. The paint seems to want to flow off the canvases into the room, but even more, light flowed throughout the paintings, and out to fill the space in the room. I studied the color. How did Rubens do it? What I remember most are drops of water on the flesh of one of the naiads – the drops were painted in a touches of a spectral sequence of pure hues. These drops, when viewed closely were just splotches of paint, raw materiality, yet when one stepped back they became images - drops of water that projected into the space of the room. The naiads and the paintings in general shared this double nature – narrative and allegorical. The liquidity of the paint somehow added to these shifts of meaning, it seems a condition of change and transformation.

These experiences stayed with me when I tried to understand the huge canvases of the New York School in shows I saw later at the Modern, the Whitney, and the Guggenheim – Newman, de Kooning, Kline, Pollock – I saw their paintings through my experience of Rubens. Without understanding why – a naive kid from San Diego, I found that I wanted to be a high style New York painter.

I’d like to quote from a review by Arthur Danto that appeared in 1986 in the Nation:

Visiting the Galleries of Baroque painting at the Metropolitan Museum of Art one afternoon, some friends and I paused before Rubens’s portrait of himself with his family, and reminded one another what a remarkable man he was. A painter of stupefying energy and force, he ran a workshop, listened to music as he painted, did the classical scholarship for cycles of paintings that required erudite references, conversed easily in six languages and discharged ambassadorial missions of great delicacy – his second wife, Helen Fourment, was delivered of his last child nine months after his death. One of my companions, the painter David Reed, said, meditatively, that most artists he knows strive to emulate Van Gogh: “Maybe we ought to try to be like Rubens instead.


The possibilities of transparency were the first lesson I learned from Rubens. There is a legendary book for painters by Jacques Maroger – The Secret Formulas and Techniques of the Masters. He writes about Rubens: “The changes he brought about in the medium … converted it into the most facile and versatile vehicle that any painter has ever had at his disposal. Technically, there seems to have been no limit to its possibilities…” He describes Rubens’s secret formula for a jellied transparent medium. Looking hard at some paintings by Rubens I couldn’t believe how much color he achieved through transparency. The white grounds of the studies were covered with a transparent glaze of brown. Then to make flesh he glazed a pale white/pink over the brown glaze. To my amazement I saw that the white as it thinned out caused a strange green to appear. Warm glaze over warm glaze and Rubens got a cold. That’s what I wanted, an unexpected third color, out of a glaze of one color over another.

The second lesson was a principle of Contrast –– grays that seem like color. Rubens uses grays and makes them to be hues. One has the illusion of perceiving blues, greens, and violets. The gray appears as the complimentary color of whatever warm color is next to it. I love this color that is not there. (Show slide of painting of Samson and Delilah in London)


Rubens_samdel.jpg


In an interview, Bridget Riley speaks about the spectral light in a another painting by Rubens in the National Gallery in London. “These flesh colors generate the internal radiance of Rubens.” In an example of this effect, in “The Union of Earth and Water” the pale flesh tones of the goddess of Antwerp are brought out by the same purer hues in the still life of flowers and fruits next to her. (Show slide)

Riley goes on to describe how Rubens invented a way of intertwining color and surface of light across a painting. Before, there was always a problem of local color – one mass for color for an object – Rubens used shadows, transparency, and reflected light to drawn color through forms and relate them to the background and other forms. He learned how to do this from Titian and Tintoretto.

I want even more of this kind of extreme light in my paintings – a screen light, technological light, like the Baroque light from God but not directional, not metaphysical but instead homogeneous and projecting from the surface – technicolor paintings. The one aspect of color that I hold constant in my paintings is intensity to unify the light. I don’t have to worry about depicting figures – using value changes to make the forms go round. For me the elements of color can be even more separated and this gives me more freedom. I am discovering more possibilities than even Rubens could use.

My paintings have an all-over, un-located, endless space, filled with a very peculiar media light. I want to crack this space open so it leaks into the room and connects to a viewer. What is important is an interaction that occurs between the painting and a viewer. There is no easy whole. The participation of viewer is most important. I'm wondering now if the viewer can be persuaded to assume a role.

Painting is the most corrupt, debased form of art and that is its strength and hope. It has possibilities now because it is impure. Painting is very good at absorbing influences. In Western culture it has had a grand symbiotic relationship with Christianity, and today it can have just as rich a relationship with technologies of mechanical and digital reproduction.

For a while it was thought that photography and other media of mechanical reproduction would kill painting. But now we know that the opposite has happened – instead photography gave painting new life, new possibilities. Painting is like the beloved, the enthralled, who has been bitten by the vampire of mechanical reproduction. Rather than killing painting, the vampire’s kiss has instead made painting immortal.

Complicating these relationships even further, there has been a change in the meaning of photography because of the new ease of digital manipulation. Not long ago, photography was an index of reality – no more. A photographic reference might now even be an index of fantasy. The marks in my new paintings are not as much doubled as transformed – not one thing or the other, but instead caught changing from one thing to another.

Walking along the Strip at dusk last night, I could not separate man-made and natural colors. The pinks, mauves, and off-blues of the sunset often seemed more garish, more exotic, than the neon signs and artificial lights. When I painted such sunsets in the desert many years ago, I located myself on the revolving Earth on the edge between the light of day and the shadow of night. I tried to capture the last light; the colors that crossed over the distant horizon and had come the greatest distance possible from the sun before reaching me. Overexcited, my hands were often covered with paint and colored light. Walking on the strip last night my hands were covered with similar hues and I felt that I was not walking but swimming through changing color. At times I thought I had lost the boundaries of my body and I no longer knew who I was.

I would love to walk along the Strip with Rubens. He would probably be reminded of his time in Rome. He went to Rome in 1600 when he was 23 and returned 8 years later. I imagine him walking with me in Las Vegas as an older man – perhaps with his young wife and children. In his paintings of her, she seems just out of the bath, once dressed in a bearskin. We could talk about the influence of his imagery. Rubens would love the variety of the lights and I know that he’d like the work of the abstract painters now working in Las Vegas: Tim Bavington, Yek Wong, and Jack Hallberg.

hallberg1.jpg

(Hallberg, Born Rockford, IL; lives in Las Vegas, NV)

Cézanne turned Rubens’s three naiads in the Medici painting in the Louvre into his bathers – beings whose boundaries are indeterminate. They merge with nature. This is one way into abstraction.

I’d like to end by trying to talk about the most important aspect of Rubens. It’s the most difficult aspect for me to articulate: the sexuality of his images. Looking at the paintings while I’ve been here I’m convinced that this sexuality is much more complex than the cliché version that we all know. First of all, sensuality is often used for political purposes. The beautiful women and their union with a male is an image of peace, prosperity, and happiness. The feasts of dancing and love show a world that can be achieved through good politics.

Rubens designed and supervised the painting of nine huge gates to be set up in Antwerp to welcome the new ruler. One of these gates, The Temple of Janus (1634), warns of the dangers of war. It should be set up in Washington now, right across from the White House. In the painting, the personification of the Fury of war is about to escape from the Temple of Janus, whose doors in Rome were traditionally shut during times of peace. The door has two wings, and the allegorical female figure on the left is opening the door, while the figure on the right is trying to keep it closed - to prevent the Fury of war from wreaking havoc. The painting is about political decision-making.


rubens_temple.JPG


Too often the erotics of Rubens’s paintings are oversimplified as a male lust to possess a woman. I think Rubens loved and admired women so much that the paintings are more about a desire to merge with another mode of experience – a desire to be possessed. In the arguments in France between the advocates of Poussin and those of Rubens, the paintings of Rubens were always connected with feminine qualities and were placed in opposition to the more masculine rational virtues of the Poussin’s paintings. Rubens paintings offer a complex view of masculinity. They are omni-sexual, even subversive and transgressive – very aware of the dangers of love. Rubens identified with and often portrayed himself as a surprising character: Silenus, a minor god and follower of Bacchus. This most accomplished of painters, successful and wealthy, the painter diplomat, portrayed himself as fat, old, drunk, and unpleasantly self-destructive. This is not at all what one would expect. Why did he choose to portray himself in this way? Because he thought of himself as a man who was at his best when he lost control. The drinking and helpless stupor of Silenus is a way to portray this loss of control. In his life, Rubens didn’t lose control, but he did lose himself while he was painting. And he lost himself when he was in love.

______________________

This article, and similar ones by practicing artists, should be published in major art publications. Indeed, especially if criticism is in a crisis, reading the writings of those “at the front,” the actual creators, could be a great stimulus for evolving new, appreciative yet critical, intellectual yet sensual forms of writing about art. Reed is open to rewriting and expanding this speech for print publication. I call on all the editors I know, and any others who read this, to approach him about it. And other practicing artists as well. Meanwhile, the blogosphere will have to take up the slack. Moreover, it appears that if we want to read articulate yet corporal, passionately invigorating views on painting, it will have to be done by painters.

The show took place at the Guggenheim hermitage Museum in Las Vegas
Website here.
Page about the Rubens show here.

Garage Rock and Chicago, a Podcast

First published March 17, 2007

coolestsongs.jpg

The latest installment of the famed Garage Rock radio-pod-cast show named “Little Steven’s Underground Garage” has Chicago as its theme. Some great music, quotations and more. Go to the site at http://www.littlestevensundergroundgarage.com/splash.htm
or directly to the clickable “jukebox” here:
http://linux.littlesteven.com/nebuplayer/258/06jukebox.html
Unfortunately there is no downloadable form. The main page’s intro film is worth watching before listening. A lot of fun.

Dictatorship of the Consensoriat

First published March 9, 2007

shark_consensus_contract.jpg

I wish to introduce a new word and a new phrase into the international artworld dialogue. The Dictatorship of the Consensoriat. Please assist me by using it every chance you get. Forming neologisms is one of my favorite diversions, especially now that I have been learning Latin. It may be a slightly arcane hobby, but I enjoy it, and terminology can control far more of ones thought processes than we are often happy to admit — therefore, why not grab the bull by the horns and begin to develop our own phrases for what we feel it is necessary to discuss or critique. Shakespeare created words like amazement and radiance, which have become commonplace. These made-up words have stood the test of time because they expressed notions people wanted to articulate, and because they were understandable. Let's hope I can do something similar, if less inspired. In fact, Shakespeare, in his plays, sonnets, and poems, used approximately 17,677 different words —and of those 17,677 words, 1,700 were brand-new, coined by him.


While immersed in my local struggle with the regional outpost of the "consensus clan" (as reported in Sharkforum here), I began to see that I needed a few new terms. Wesley's "Smart Set" is witty, but not understandable enough outside the US. My contributions usually nit-pick one or two professions unnecessarily, for the drive to the herd mentality manifests itself in all the sub-layers of the artworld currently. Therefore I began to play with Latin (rather freely and not always correctly, thus making what is known as "ML," or Modern Latin). I needed a term for the international cabal of consensus-thinkers, and I needed a phrase containing that word to express the power-control situation of the artworld since about 1987. I played with consensus, primarily, as that expresses the problem concisely. I tried to find a word expressing "those who seek only consensus" or something similar. I remembered the old Communist sententious saw, "The Dictatorship of the Proletariat." Mixing that with censor, and utilizing the similar and appropriate ending –iat, I had my term and phrase. (-at, or –ate, or –iat, is a suffix occurring in loanwords from Latin. In English the use as a verbal suffix has been extended to stems of non-Latin origin, and by way of French into the formation of certain nouns.)

I suspect I need not exactly define the group to whom I am referring, as most of us deal with them on a daily basis. Let me repeat a definition from the Sharkforum Glossary of Terms I wrote a while back here.

Consensus Clique= A few people gathered together, who actively exclude as many others as possible (particularly artists) and tacitly agree to agree on everything. They check in with each other regularly and only promote the lowest common denominator of what they concur on. This is not a conspiracy, they say, just a very convenient conformity of (small) minds to have identical tastes in order to achieve hegemony.

Let them now be called the Consensoriat (when they have positions of power), and let the sub-period of time at the close of Postmodernism be designated the Dictatorship of the Consensoriat

More High Times Hard Times New York Paintings 1967–1975, Interview with Katy Siegel and David Reed by Phong Bui

First published March 7, 2007

Colmer.jpg

As David Reed says, "Hard times are good times for painting."

The exhibit High Times Hard Times New York Paintings 1967–1975 features over forty significant works by thirty artists and is on view at the National Academy Museum until April 22, 2007. Curator Katy Siegel and David Reed, who served as the exhibit’s advisor, discuss the work and artists included in this broad survey of experimental abstract painting in an encouraging interview published in the Brooklyn Rail, the magazine of art criticism and discussion by Phong Bui.

Here are a couple short excerpts:

Siegel: Even though Gerhard Richter probably didn’t see Jack Whitten’s paintings; Fabian didn’t know about Joe Overstreet. But I think what it shows you is how fresh and how relevant this painting is. Younger painters who have seen the catalogue and people who have seen the show in North Carolina and Washington are very excited to see all this work. It gives them a history to think about. And as far as painting being an ongoing dialogue, I think that’s absolutely true, especially to those who are open and receptive to new possibilities and insights. For instance, in Jessica Stockholder’s show a few years ago at Gorney Bravin Lee, where, along with her own work (part of the history of two/three dimensional playing), she included many works by her friends and artists she admired. In her show were paintings by Marilyn Minter, who makes shimmering realistic images, along with abstract paintings by David Reed and James Siena. Usually the web of connections isn’t so explicit, but they are always implicit, packed into the work itself; in Lisa Yuskavage’s or Dana Schutz’s or Carrie Moyer’s paintings, you see all kinds of historical references (whether to Piero della Francesca or Ernst Kirchner or Jules Olitski), kinship with their contemporaries, and interest in a million other images and experiences that do not belong to painting. The dialogue of painting is not the only one for these artists, just like your relationship with your father and mother isn’t just your only important relationship.



Brooklyn Rail: ... The painting in the show is not just a discourse about and among painting, per se, but painting resulting and reflecting from all mediums and fields of disciplines, including all of the things that were part of the beginning of the consuming and technological culture of the ’60s.

Siegel: So the emphatically missing word here is that it’s not “New York School” painting, it’s New York painting; that’s another important distinction.

Reed: It’s a good time for painting when it is under stress, when it is questioned and doubted, even for social and political reasons. That is when painting has to prove itself, when you get the best work. Hard times are good times for painting.

Go read the entire piece at: http://brooklynrail.org/2007-02/art/seigel-reed.
The Brooklyn Rail is always worth a read, check out their website and keep up on new and extraordinary art in NYC.

Painting Back in the Olden Days When It Was (Proclaimed) Dead

First published February 28, 2007

47Cristensen.jpg
(Dan Christensen Untitled, 1968, 90 X 70 inches, Acrylic on Canvas)

David Reed and Katy Siegel, a painter and art historian, respectively, both of whom I treasure have organized an exhibition at the National Academy Museum. Here is an excerpt from Roberta Smith's review of the show in the NY Times of 16 February 2007.

NY Times: Art Review of "High Times, Hard Times"
"Painting in the Heady Days, After It Was Proclaimed Dead"
Roberta Smith


New York painting from the late 1960s and early ’70s — when the medium supposedly was dead — is one of the biggest elephants in the room of recent art history. The nonpainting trends of those years have been relentlessly celebrated and valorized by museums, art historians and biennials. The multiple strands of Post-Minimalism that ended painting’s dominance — Conceptual, Process, Performance, Earth and video art — have coalesced into a canon and master narrative of their own. The king is dead, long live the king.

But painting? What happened to painting after the final big bangs of Pop and Minimalism, as Modernism wound down, is both exceedingly complicated and relatively unexamined. Enter “High Times, Hard Times: New York Painting, 1967-1975,” a brave if deficient exhibition organized by Independent Curators International, which concludes its three-stop tour at the National Academy Museum.

(...) The show passes over the artists who dominated painting during this period, like Jasper Johns, Frank Stella, Brice Marden, Robert Mangold and Robert Ryman. Young Turks of that moment, like David Diao and Peter Young, are here, but the whole project feels a bit hollow at the center, like a time capsule from a time that didn’t quite exist.

Still, with 42 works by 37 artists, "High Times, Hard Times" is a start and should inspire further attempts. It was proposed by the painter David Reed and assembled by the art historian and critic Katy Siegel in consultation with Mr. Reed. Sketchy as the final outcome often is, they and Independent Curators International are to be commended for tackling a job that a flush New York museum should have taken on about 10 years ago. Whatever its problems, this exhibition demonstrates a central truth: far from being dead during the period in question, painting was in an uproar. (...)

(...)In the end, this exhibition would have been better titled “New York Painting, 1967-75: The Untold Story.” Its problem, simply, is that the larger, more familiar story of the painting of this period has yet to be told. But this exhibition, pulled off by a small nonprofit art organization with no gallery space of its own, has taken the plunge, and it suggests all kinds of possible exhibitions: surveys of Ralph Humphrey’s or Ms. Fishman’s career, for example, or of New York painting in the late 1970s and even the ’80s. Perhaps it will remind New York’s big museums to think outside the box of the blue-chip retrospective or the sampling of current gallery trends and examine painting’s neglected recent past in ways that might benefit its present and future.

"High Times, Hard Times: New York Painting, 1967-1975" through April 22, the National Academy Museum, NYC, NY.

Read the whole review here.

National Academy Museum here.

Image: Dan Christensen Untitled, 1968, 90 X 70 inches, Acrylic on Canvas

Lisa Hunter: How-to for Art Communities Outside the 212

First published February 11, 2007

girl_gallery.jpg

"When NYC was Flyover Land for Collectors: Pollock's tale of how Halpert promoted her artists and snagged influential collectors, despite an initially indifferent public, could be read as a how-to for art communities outside the 212. And it's a cautionary tale for regional collectors who think their local artists have nothing to offer."


What! Heresy! Lisa Hunter, whose great book (and accompanying website) The Intrepid Art Collector, I have plugged before on Sharkforum, has a new post of interest. Hunter plugs ANOTHER author's book, The Girl With the Gallery: Edith Gregor Halpert And the Making of the Modern Art Market by Lindsay Pollock.

Let's let Hunter speak: "When I first picked up Lindsay Pollock's new book, The Girl with the Gallery, I figured it would be one of those insider-ish art-world books you have to be a New Yorker to care about. Boy, was I wrong.

The "girl with the gallery," Edith Halpert, is a little-remembered but hugely influential Greenwich Village art dealer who essentially created the market for American modern art. Back in the 1920s, when Halpert started her Downtown Gallery, American critics and collectors shunned their home-grown product. "Real" artists, in their view, came from Europe, not 8th Street. The scenario sounds exactly like the attitude non-New York artists have to deal with today.

Pollock's tale of how Halpert promoted her artists and snagged influential collectors, despite an initially indifferent public, could be read as a how-to for art communities outside the 212. And it's a cautionary tale for regional collectors who think their local artists have nothing to offer. "
Posted by Lisa Hunter at The Intrepid Art Collector

Another source of info on the book:
From Publishers Weekly
"Pollock, who reports on the art market for Bloomberg News, retrieves a uniquely American story: a plucky heroine escapes Russia with her parents, grows up in New York poverty and ends up owning one of the most influential and successful art galleries of the 20th century, one that virtually created the market for American art. Startlingly young when she embarked on her career in 1926, Edith Gregor Halpert (1900–1970) was one of the few gallery owners with an eye for the American avant-garde of the '20s, '30s and '40s. She recognized genius in Stuart Davis, made folk art trendy during the Depression and rescued from obscurity such classic artworks as Raphaelle Peale's After the Bath. She was prickly and often defensive, assertive and opinionated. These qualities brought her independence and financial security; they also led to loneliness and an ungraceful decline. Most interesting in Pollock's account are Halpert's difficult interactions with others in the business and with her artists, particularly Alfred Stieglitz and Georgia O'Keeffe. It's surprising that Halpert, who paved the way for women in a male-dominated field, is so little known today; this book is long overdue."

The book at Barnes and Noble, here

Is David Reed our Caravaggio, or at least Annibale Carracci?

First published February 6, 2007

reed1.jpg

reed2.jpg

Yes, we at Sharkforum do lots of artworld politicizing, but have other irons in the fire as well: introduction and discussion of new or underexposed artists, especially painters; discussions of culture in a broader sense; — and much more. In particular, I would like to introduce a series by several of us which is intended to discuss various problems of the post-postmodern painter. I have already begun this with my blog a while back on iconosequentiality, a compositional form. Now I would like to discuss the stroke, painting and "media" awareness. I will do this indirectly by discussing a midcareer retrospective of New York painter David Reed and the catalogue which accompanied it.

David Reed is one of the most significant painters, artists in general, currently working. His position as such is brought to a head in a catalogue on the occasion of a quasi-retrospective exhibition of his works in the Kunstmuseum St. Gallen and the Kunstverein Hannover. His work sums up the moment, yet supplies lively counsel for the future of visual art. The question both the exhibition and the book highlight can be simply framed: “Is David Reed our Caravaggio?”


The title of the catalogue is David Reed: You Look Good in Blue. The subtitle is an allusion to a pop song by the 80s New Wave group Blondie, which Reed’s studio assistants frequently played while working on one series of his works. The lyric phrase from which it is excerpted is completed “it matches your skin.” This is appropriate for Reed’s color-range, which consists of tertiary, quirky, yet rich hues, which feel personally associative yet can be almost inhumanly cool.

Reed’s eccentric colors and formats suggest a mannerist antimodernism; his abstract, painterly integration of the technological image and the hand-made one proposes a new anti-Postmodernism which can be compared to art at the birth of the Baroque. Postmodernism thus far has been an ever-duller period of transition. The shadow of High Modernism hangs over us, much as that of the Renaissance did over the Mannerists. In place of Donatello, Leonardo, Raphael, etc., — and most of all Michelangelo, we have the School of Paris, the Action Painters, Pop, the Conceptualists, Minimalists, etc., — and most of all Duchamp. The postmodern artworld is dominated by distended copyists of Duchamp; Mannerists such as Vasari endlessly “sampled” and combined aspects of Michelangelo’s work. As summed up so well by famed art historian Walter Friedlaender, Mannerist art’s traits tended to be stretched proportions, capriciously patterned rhythm, broken symmetry, willful dissonance, unreal and unresolved space, overly fashionable (although not intellectual) theorizing, coldly calculated style, exaggeration of borrowed forms — in short, confused over-refinement. This list can be easily converted by anyone knowledgeable of contemporary art into a description of the various Neo-Styles of Postmodernism. Exaggerated spectacle, capricious “shoddy-chic” structure, unresolved technological borrowings, overly fashionable poststructuralist theorization, and so on. Where Mannerism had great artists such as Rosso Fiorentino, it also included Alessandro Allori “who flooded all Tuscany with his insipid pictures,” as stated by Friedlaender (in Mannerism and Anti-Mannerism in Italian Painting, originally published in 1925). Substitute the postmodern junk installation, commodity critique, "bad painting," "shitty drawing" or spectacle artist of your choice in that phrase.

However weak, historical Mannerism was not merely a bewildered conjunction between the Renaissance and the Baroque. It was a necessary and meaningful passage, allowing the development of that less bizarre and more natural successor to the Renaissance, the Baroque. Some things simply must be worked through. In this vein, we have required Postmodernism in art and culture at large. Nevertheless, we have dragged out the learning phase far too long, for various commercial and sophistically careerist reasons. Mannerism transmuted into the Baroque by achieving an aggressive purposefulness, a vigorousness that was the reverse of the Renaissance in technique (painterly as opposed to linear), yet similar temperamentally. Artists made Mannerist dissonance more practical, more individual, seemingly natural, less abstruse, more corporeal, more playful. They were able to accept influence without being driven into pastiche. The way was shown by Cigoli, Cerano, the Carracci and most importantly Michelangelo da Caravaggio. These artists believed they were returning to a more classical form, when in fact they were integrating and uniting Mannerist traits into a new whole. Caravaggio gave density back to hue, brought forthright vision back through reference to everyday life, and replaced clutter with dynamic effect. His tools importantly included naturalistic reference and chiaroscuro — that amazing effect of simple light and dark which allowed him to plastically retain distortion by transforming it into theatrical space. The realistic portrayal of a pre-framed, mediated yet real event, the stage. His simple breakthrough was astounding in its implications, empowering such later masters as Rembrandt and Rubens.

reed3.jpg

This could serve as both an astute parallel to our period and a promising roadmap of where to go. The path is being cleared now by an ever-growing group of painters beginning with Jonathan Lasker, Mary Heilmann and others, but most notably by Reed as shown in this exhibition and catalogue. He has invented several artistic devices that could lead to a much needed post- (anti-?) Postmodernism which incorporates the discoveries of this period into a healthier whole. This will establish the next phase, a parallel of the change to the Baroque, yet decidedly not a neo-Baroque (which would be merely another postmodern Neo-ism).

Reed’s breakthroughs correspond to those of Caravaggio. Reed has the courage to repeatedly refer to “life,” something hardly allowed by theoreticians nowadays. On the other hand, his work is informed by mass media, in his case in the form of Technicolor film, more than by illusionistic rendering. The paintings have an emphatic and iconic use of light and shadow which is highly contrived. It feels correct yet artificial, while being the direct result of the artist’s imaginative use of painterly facture. Reed’s ribbon-like strokes are painterly yet not expressionist. In particular, Reed utilizes the evocative beauty of translucent alkyd or oil glazes, with curlicue marks often sprayed lightly from the side to feign shadow. His integration of mediated reality with haptically achieved effect is a promising guide, not to be copied but to serve as inspiration for similar innovations. Reed amalgamates the conceptual and sensual, naturalizing the quirky antagonisms of Postmodernism into a rebirth of the self-secure impact of Modernism, while turning Modernism on its head by rejecting purism and reductivism. Not least of all, he does this cultural metamorphosis in painting, a medium still under censure by many powerful Postmodernists. Each of the essays in this catalogue addresses in its own fashion an aspect of Reed’s status as the pre-eminent pathfinder out of Postmodernism.

One joy of many recent artists’ catalogues is that they contain several essays, allowing one the pleasure of considering the same works from distinct, even conflicting, viewpoints. This can be a terrible weakness as well. Often catalogues become nothing more than examples of the International Consensus Clique patting themselves and each other on the back for "appreciating" (in all senses) the correct, CC artists, with no actual scholarly criticism, a new form of vanity publication that becomes a vanitas. This is one reason why catalogues have been looked on somewhat askance in the US while being loved in Europe, where criticism is in even a sorrier state than America, as hard as that is to believe.

Nevertheless, this publication is quite good and features 3 essays, each in both German and English. Katy Siegel offers "David Reed: Painting Over Time;" Konrad Bitterli authors "Pictorial Striptease: On David Reed and His Painting No. 467, 2000;" and Stephan Berg contributes "Technicolor Vampires." These three discussions supply a fine opportunity for comparison. Wouldn’t it be exciting to extend this idea and have two or more reviews of the same exhibition or book in an art magazine, where the articles would have the freedom to be even more critical? That would be truly fascinating postmodernist publishing. And — perhaps including essays more critical of the artist in catalogues? It is a shame, but the economics of the funding of such books makes that impossible.

Siegel is a professor of contemporary art history and criticism at Hunter College, City University of New York, and a frequent contributor to Artforum. Bitterli is the curator of the Kunstmuseum St. Gallen, one of the co-sponsors of the show. The other sponsor is the Kunstverein Hannover, where the third essayist Berg is the director. This last contributor also co-authored the Forward with Roland Wäspe, the director of the Kunstmuseum St. Gallen.

Publications such as David Reed : You Look Good in Blue are so vital that they beg for a designation other than “catalogue.” They are too small and not scholarly enough to be termed monographs, yet too intellectually stimulating to bear the sales-brochure-like associations of the word catalogue. I propose we find some new word, perhaps like monotract. I beg artworld masters of neologism to please do better than that.

In additional to it’s textual complexity, this catalogue has several visually interesting design traits. Scattered throughout the book are small photos of the paintings “as they live,” that is in situ — where they hang in private homes, offices, galleries or storage. Several sections are on colored background pages in hues derived from Reed’s paintings. The last 13 pages bear images placed end-to-end, much like a filmstrip, stretching edge-to-edge horizontally on this 20 H by 29 L cm catalogue. Additionally, these photos of paintings are often split, continuing on the following page. This section playfully alludes to Reed’s odd, extremely long horizontal stretcher formats and split-screen-like surface divisions. The majority of reproductions in the catalogue, however, are thankfully centered on pages in a traditional way.



The various senses of Siegel’s title "David Reed: Painting Over Time" are explicitly elaborated by the author to succinctly describe Reed’s development. She begins with the painter’s early body-based works and continues to the present, thus delineating a sense of painting as occurring through a lifetime.

Reed’s intention in his first mature works was to make panels bearing clear and direct brushstrokes, each adjoined to another panel of straightforward monochrome color. Upon viewing the completed works, he realized that they achieved the inverse of his objective. The monochrome section looked linear, the strokes seemed colorful, and both appeared to be representations of themselves, due to the elegance of their application. According to Siegel, Reed was astute enough to expand on this surprise. It led him to a provocative “unreality” effect. The artist changed from a brush to a palette knife and from thick opaque paint to translucent glaze, making his fluid marks perversely appear to be “pictures of brushstrokes,” merging the haptic with the iconic. This is both a celebration of the mediated and an intensification of real painterly surface, a discovery with affinity to Caravaggio’s chiaroscuro, returning us to the Mannerist/Baroque comparison once again. Siegel, like Berg later, concludes that photography is “the implicit ghost haunting” Reed’s work, that he is using painting to cover time, simulating the frozen instant of mechanical images.

Siegel goes on to describe two fashions in which, in addition to the still camera, Reed’s cinematic desires manifest themselves in his works: his video-painting installations and the long, narrow, horizontal format of many canvases. Some pieces are more than 10 times wider than they are high. The installations are a droll and marvelous way to trick ill-disposed curators into contemplating the dreaded media of painting. Reed digitally inserts a painting of his own into a favorite film scene, such as one from Hitchcock’s Vertigo. The same painting then hangs near the monitor playing the video amidst recreated furniture from the shot sequence. The horizontal stretchers are more momentous, though. Through them, Reed forces the viewer to scan the surface in what is called a pan in film . Whereas the Baroque borrowed from the stage, this visual tracking in Reed’s art makes what is “natural” becomes theatrical in our contemporary terms, cinema. Thus this painting locates time within the perceiver.

In conclusion, Siegel points out how Reed’s works are a result of our culture’s continued basis in physical fact, but are saturated with virtuality. She mentions that there are at least three possibilities for visual art now. The first is to use technology to mimic technology (such as Neo-Conceptual commodity works, or photo-copyists). The second is to retreat into oneself or ones medium (examples would be the Neo-Expressionists and the “radical” monochromists). Third, an artist may make traditional art objects which are highly affected by current technology, in which category she places Reed. Siegel has a good point, but her “at least” must be emphasized; several additional possibilities can also quickly be envisioned.

My contention is that however it is done, the best new art such as Reed’s arises from a new multi-medial literacy. One which is already so thoroughly a function of thought, a Denktechnik, that it can be present in any medium and is often most effectively embodied in the so-called traditional media of painting (and the novel for that matter). HOWEVER, rather than practicing an adoration of new media technology and disparaging older ones, the best current art has stopped worshiping or reproaching our tools and begun to use them. It is also critical, even negatively so, of the aspects of popular (or vernacular) culture it addresses — unlike the plethora of bad drawing featuring snatches of half remembered TV culture. The importance of an idea is in its application — the philosophical interaction of the artist with new ways to envision life. Significance can often be better thought through in conditions of self-imposed circumscription, testing and transgressing the boundaries of received deliberation. In this light the “traditional” media of painting is the major league of discourse. It offers slightly more resistance than newer forms to the vagaries of trendiness, a large measure of self-reliance in production, proven philosophical openness, sheer presence, anti-Puritanical sensuality, and a tradition of shedding the skin of tradition itself — confidence in redefinition rather than cultural amnesia and ignorance.

Reed’s paintings supply this, with a surfeit of physical quality as well: beautiful surface, seductive paint handling and composition refinement. All in a quirky, individualistic fashion that can bring one to recall Francesco del Cairo or Lorenzo Lotto, both of whom Reed is very knowledgeable of and loves to discuss. Reed’s work is art about art, but with a connection to tradition, according to Siegel. As she writes, it is possible to both “paint and go to the movies.” Furthermore, one can put these acts together to elucidate life, Reed himself adds in conversation.



I’ve written about Konrad Bitterli’s essays in the past. Although a painting-detractor in the 80s, Bitterli has evolved into a curator who now appreciates the medium, or at least claims to do so. He has a tendency to be too Consensus Conscious in his choices for shows and articles, however his best essays have been published discussions of the painters Jonathan Lasker, Mary Heilmann and Hanspeter Hofmann. His contribution here breaks new ground. He tries nothing short of attempting to resurrect, close-reading and formalist attention to detail for a new, wholly anti-formalist agenda. Much like Reed’s paintings, Bitterli’s gambit, if indeed he is conscious of it, may be baroque-like too. He is outflanking the current proclivity for manneristically quaint theories, jumping back to a neigh-High Modernist form of “paying attention” to the object. Nevertheless, he has clearly learned from the insights of postmodernist theorization how to include a healthy measure of uncertainty in his critical tactic. This is a heady vision of artwriting summed up in an excerpt from Bitterli’s epigraph quoting Dave Hickey: “the efficacy of images must be the cause of criticism, and not its consequence.”

Bitterli’s essay begins with a description of Reed’s studio rooms (painting room, sanding room, viewing room, etc.), which leads into a precise explanation of Reed’s techniques, in particular his subtraction by sanding. That is, first Reed paints freely with alkyd glazes and a palette knife. Due to a dense layer of hard ground primer, the artist is able to have assistants sand off what he doesn’t want, then repaint those areas, again and again. This gives Reed the seemingly incongruous abilities to paint with physical spontaneity, while creating an aloof, glass-like surface.

The article then continues by anchoring the author’s insights in a close, bit-by-bit visual analysis of the work titled simply No. 46 7, the painting also featured on the cover of the book. No.467 and another painting called No. 464 are the two most important and promising works in the show and book. They beg to be the harbingers of the next Baroque. In them, Reed leaves the pastel colors and ribbon-candy marks behind, but still achieves all his goals. No. 467 is one of the most visually dense and rich paintings of Reed’s to date. By analyzing this piece, it’s unfettered strokes, intensely cinematic hues, and dense layering , Bitterli succeeds in conveying his contention that Reed’s work is a “kind of striptease, a simultaneous strip and tease process of both painterly clarification and painterly camouflage: a pleasurable, even erotic approach to painting that is itself extraordinarily sensuous.” Thus the title of the essay is not only an insight in Reed’s art, but serves as an equally good description of Bitterli’s mutated-formalist reading. He strips the painting visually element-by-element, then puts it back together, teasing out multiple meanings by appreciative and sensual attention to the object.

While being wholly in the present tense by concentrating on the singularity of one painting, Bitterli links Reed’s work to history in two senses — the artist’s personal development as a painter and art history in a larger cultural sense. This is important nowadays, when too many people appear to purposefully ignore history in order to be better consumers, yet contrarily also seem unable to concentrate on the necessarily sensual “presentness” of paintings. Reed himself has beautifully stated his awareness of being within living history, at the present, accepting the fact that there is art both before and after his own. We must abandon the desire to do the first or last painting, a permanent mirage of Modernism. At the same time, we need to forsake Postmodernism’s spurious memory-loss. Both have become attempts to aggrandize oneself and avoid one’s horror of influence.

Bitterli’s summary paragraph shows, with his epigraph, where Reed, painting and Bitterli’s criticism are going. “[A]n analytical approach can in no way explain the fascination that radiates from Reed’s work. Formulated as a thesis, this lies in its outright, shameless beauty,... a sensuous-erotic presence of color and form.”



The springboard for Stephan Berg’s discussion "Technicolor Vampires" is Reed’s well-known obsession with Technicolor films of the vampire genre. This popular cultural interest of the artist’s culminated in his 1996 exhibition in Graz, Austria based on the theme of the undead and mirrors. It has implications for the works seen in this catalogue as well. These films are perfect inspiration for deliberating on Reed’s art, with their visually startling protagonists who conversely have no reflections in mirrors and cannot be photographed. It is conceivable that Reed’s pictures themselves have no looking glass images and can only come into your life if invited. Berg sees vampire films as a pivotal metaphor for understanding Reed’s art, “instead of a window on reality ... the idea is born that paintings are the shadows of realities that can never claim for themselves the status of solid, corporeal existence.” Furthermore, the author indicates how much Reed’s hues and long horizontal formats owe to wide-screen cinema. As if to emphasize this in the exhibition, the painter hung a grouping of works from floor to ceiling on one wall, thereby creating a distinctly split-screen effect.

reed4.jpg

Reed’s Draculaic trope rests in the self-contradicting vitality of painting, that “the reality of a painted image always includes its unreality.” This art form is self-referential and yet oppositely dependent on life as well. However, in addition to Reed’s interest in popular culture, he is in deep discussion with the tradition of his chosen fine-art form. Reed’s paintings are, as discerningly stated by Berg, a “reflection on the painterly contexts of Mannerism, the Baroque, American Abstract Expressionism and Minimal Art.” The painter has discovered a new mode of creating effects of light and shade through the thickness and thinness of paint application. The great cinquecento painter Tintoretto, through late Titian, united the supposed dichotomies of desegno and colore in the painterly (yet not expressionist) stroke, a daring synthesis of linear Roman and haptic Venetian ideals. Correspondingly, we now need such a philosophical approach in contemporary visual art. Reed’s paintings point to a potential transumptive integration of antitheses like mediated and physical experience, semblance and concept, sensuality and intellectuality.

Berg, like Siegel, describes Reed’s painting as haunted by the ghost of photography. If so, he has incorporated its traits far more ingeniously than Gerhard Richter. I feel that Reed is haunted by film more than by photography. Artists now should be bewitched by many things, as Caravaggio was possessed by theatrical stage space. Image-making media can learn from one another and press their own individual boundaries thanks to the differences between them — interaction with difference. Although painter Sean Scully has correctly pointed out that a limiting obsession with the seemingly photographic surface has become all pervasive, we should not abandon allusions to the photo, just not limit our spooks to that — and we must not forget to evaluate and criticize our ghosts as well. The field of ghosts can be expanded to include references to life including any other ways in which we encounter images in life. Reed accomplishes this in both his paintings and video installations. Berg sees this “double constellation of painting and installation” as “the creation of a link between the painting and the site in which it is adequately visible now only because the site is partially undermined.” Visual art is a haunted yet auspicious site, where one can practice sciomancy, divination by shadows. Reed’s images suck on, and are suckled by, other images — yet also life.



To reiterate my introductory question, “Is David Reed our Caravaggio?” Is he an art revolutionary giving us strategies which we can use to recreate a self-assured energy similar to that of Modernism, while oppositely rebelling against and inverting modernist premises? Does he supply indications of ways to deny Postmodernism, while integrating and transuming it? Should we be following his lead as “Reedisti”?

If he is not comparable to Caravaggio, then Reed is our Annibale Carracci. This is also a fine analogy, because it could be stretched to include Lasker and Heilmann as the other two Carracci, Agostino and Lodovico. Together this family of painters pointed toward a forward-looking resolution of Mannerist, anti-Mannerist and Renaissance desires, thus heralding the Baroque — with Annibale leading as the exuberant chief reformer. Indeed, I estimate Reed to be the Caravaggio-like innovator OF THE STROKE we now require, or at least the invigorating reformer most requisite to the moment, and find this clearly evident in this catalogue and exhibition. His "media-stroke" requires additional breakthroughs in other areas to form a complete Caravaggeschi-package — invention in composition, surface, image-formation, subject matter and more. However, these are underway, I believe, in the work of the artists mentioned as well as many other contemporary painters including Kimler, me, Bullock and more.

Hence, let us hail Reed as at least the Caravaggio of out new "media-aware," yet painterly stroke.

The catalogue / book referred to is:

David Reed: You Look Good in Blue
Essays by Katy Siegel, Konrad Bitterli, Stephan Berg and Roland Wäspe
Verlag für moderne Kunst Nurenberg 2001 paper £ 22, € 30, $ 45, Sfr 52.50
88 pp. 56 color illus