Thursday, December 19, 2013

Art & Design Openings, New York, 19 December 2013


Canada 333 Broome Anke Weyer 6:30-8:30
Strange Loop 27 Orchard 7-9
Old Hollywood store event 250 Broome at Orchard 6-9 RSVP to kara@liveinfivemedia.com
Gallery 128 at 128 Rivington 6-8
Elena Ab 185 Church at Duane 6-10
Temp 57 Walker 7-11
Leslie Lohman Art & AIDs 26 Wooster 6-8
Aicon 35 Great Jones Forgotten Figures | Female Figurative Masters from the Herwitz Collection 6-8
Jussara Lee poetry by Max Blagg 60 Bedford 5-7
Bitforms 529 W 20 6-8
Ricco/Maresca 529 w 20 6-8
Printed Matter 195 10th 6-8
Agora 530 W 25 6-8
Leila Heller 568 W 25 6-8
Coohaus 547 W 27 #307 5-7
Ceres 547 W 27 6-8
Carter Burden 548 w 28 6-8
Viridian 548 W 28 6-8
Lower East Side Printshop 307 W 37 6-8
Microscope 4 Charles Place Bushwick 6-9
Space 776 at 776 Hart St 6-8Bushwick
Arcilesi & Homberg 111 DUMBO Front 6-9
Malraux’s Place 253 36th St Sunset Park 6-9

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Art & Design Events for Wednesday, 18 December, 2013, New York


Mayson 254 Broome 6-8
Capricious 88 book launch 88 Eldridge 5th Floor 6-9
William Holman 65 Ludlow 6-8
Con Artist 119 Ludlow 7-11
Zurcher studio exhibition curated by David Cohen 33 Bleecker 6-8
Tibet House 22 W 15 6-8
Garis & Hahn performance 263 Bowery 7
Cooper Union Holiday Party 4th Floor Sculpture Shop 5
EFA Holiday Party 323 W 39 7:30 please bring a food item
Bar Catalonia presents Bibi Train 206 W 41St St 6-8
Hunter College BFA show Leubsdorf Gallery 68th St & Lexington 6-8
Book Launch/reading for Stephen Karl’s Dork Swagger at Berl’s Brooklyn Poetry 126A Front DUMBO 7

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Art & Design Events for 17 December 2013, New York


Luhring Augustine 25 Knickerbocker Ave Brooklyn 5-7
Ouchi 170 Tillary Brooklyn 7-10
Con Artist 119 Ludlow 7-11
Storefront 97 Kenmare performance/taping 5-7
Housing Works Café 126 Crosby performance Joseph Eid 7-9
Cooper Union 2nd Floor Lobby 7 E 7 student work 6-8
Karma 39 Great Jones book, exhibition 6-8
Tagore 547 W 27 7-9 book launch
Michael Dawkins Home design store 232 E 59 6-9 

Saturday, December 14, 2013

New York Art Events Saturday 14 December 2013

Scheduled events, though some may be cancelled because of inclement weather.


Mondo Cane 174 Duane 6-9
Fitzroy 195 Chrystie 6-8
Cindy Rucker 141 Atorney 6-8
OK Harris 383 West Broadway 3-5
Maccarone 630 Greenwich 4-6 book signing by Ann Craven
Westbeth 55 Bethune 6-8
SVA Studios 12-6
Sonnabend presents Charlemagne Palestine 536 W 22 5-7
Cacciola 537 w 23 4-6
New Century 530 W 25 3-6
Noho 530 W 25 5-7
Viridian 548 W 28 talk/reception 4-6
Last Rites 511 W 33 7-11
Gallery 35 30 E 35th St 6-9
Manhattan Graphics Center 250 W 40 6-9 must bring some food
WSAC Broadway Mall 96th St & Broadway 2:30-5:30
Heath 24 W 120 6-9
Projekt 722 722 Metropolitan 6-8
Gristle 178 N 8 7-11
Recession 47 Bergen 1-7
Fou 535 Dean St #507 6-8

Friday, December 13, 2013

Art Openings 13 December 2013

Selected New York events for 13 December 2013


Sargent’s Daughters 179 East Broadway 6-8
DCKT 21 Orchard 6-8
Hionas 123 Forsythe 6
Invisible Exports 89 Eldridge 6-8
The Lodge 131 Chrystie 7-9
Brian Morris 163 Chrystie 6-8
NY Academy 111 Franklin 6-9
Museum of Chinese in America 215 Centre 6-8 RSVP to events@mocanyc.org
NOoSPHERE 251 E Houston 6-8
Anonymous 60 Reade St 6-9
Mariaud 153 Lafayette 7-9
Four81 481 Broadway at Broome 6-8
Leslie Lohman 127b Prince 6-8
Minus Space at 525 W 20 6-8
Cue 137 W 25 6-8
Claire Oliver 513 W 26 6-8
Sean Kelly 475 10th Ave at 36th St 6-8
Ukrainian 2 E 79 6-8

Broadway 1602 at 1181 Broadway 3rd at 28th St Fl 6-8
dm contemporary 39 E 29 6-8
Center for Book Arts Holiday Party 28 W 27 6-9

RIVAA performance and reception 527 Main St Roosevelt Island 7:30

Mighty Tanaka 111 Front 6-9
Eight of Swords 115 Grand St 7-11
Gitana Rosa 19 Hope #7 Williamsburg 7-10
Front Room 147 Roebling 7-9
Figureworks 168 N 6 6-9
Gordilloscudder 667 Evergreen Ave 7-11
House of Art 498 Marcus Garvey Blvd Brooklyn 7-10
Rhombus 183 Lorraine St 3rd Fl F or G to Smith/9th  6-8
Bed-Stuy Love Affair 214 Van Brunt 7-10
Ground Floor 343 5th St off Fifth Ave Park Slope 6-9
NARS Foundation 201 46th St Sunset Park talk and open studios 7-9:30

Thursday, October 31, 2013

Ego-Art

In some weeks the disjunctions of the artworld are illuminated with LED clarity. Such was the case a few weeks ago with the confluence of two events that indicate the real intellectual bankruptcy of too many practitioners. Marina Abramović announced the formation of the Marina Abramovic Institute: According to the press release, the Institute was “founded by Marina Abramovic and will serve as her legacy and homage to time-based and immaterial art…. [It] will focus on the study, preservation, and presentation of long durational performance including dance, theater, film, video, performance art, and music as well as new forms that may develop in the future. The institute will pursue an active role in contemporary culture by forging productive unions between art, science, technology, spirituality, and education. MAI will be an experimental space to conduct research and host workshops, public lectures, and residencies, and will serve as a venue through which the public may experience and interact with works of long durational performance.” Oh my—yet another study center devoted to the same multi-media works that museums are now rushing headlong to buy, for enormous sums. Some of these pieces exist—barely—as scripts, but the museums pay the exclusive right to right to produce them, Of course, they would never think of buying the rights to a real play. As for the Abramovic Institute, it would seem to be designed as the site where acolytes can come to kiss hem of her garment unmediated by pesky museum curators and directors. (Her distaste for the director and staff at the Museum of Modern Art, whose presentation of her staring piece catapulted her into the status of international celebrity, has been much discussed.)

Just after the Abranović ex cathedra utterance, there was, on 19 October 2013, an outdoor spectacle, “Between the Door and the street: A performance initiated by Suzanne Lacy,” as this event was entitled in the program. Occurring on a block of Park Place between Vanderbilt and Underhill in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn, near the Brooklyn Museum, it was co-sponsored by the museum and Creative Time, which has promoted art in public venues since 1974. Performers, mostly women, from a wide variety of organizations gathered on the stoops or entry courtyards of the mostly renovated and very elegant brownstones on the block; all wore long yellow scarves, and the curbs on either side of the street were lined with yellow tape of the same color. The conversations among the participants in each group were “to explore some of the most provocative issues facing women today,” according to the program, and viewers were asked to “join us, wandering freely among the different groups to listen, observe, and form your own opinions, perhaps gaining a new understanding of what feminism means to different individuals in today’s world. As you do so, you will her the voices of African American feminists, male feminists; Buddhists; economists; lawyers; domestic workers; South Asian women; gay, straight, transgendered, and queer people; old people; young people, and much more, all of them unmediated by television or radio or newspapers. It is a civic encounter than can only come from art.”

Okay, and yet--virtually no one could hear any of the conversations from the street or even at the bottom of the steps. If these talks provided a focus for future conversations, it was only among the participants, not the several hundred people walking back and forth along the block. And how do we even know what they various groups were discussing? Maybe they were discussing the donuts bits that were to be served at the end of the event. Later it was revealed there was real anger among the participants at the lack of consideration given to them by the organizers, even to the lack of day care for their children (though Creative Time claimed later in the Times that it had agreed to provide twenty five dollars to any one who needed help in order to take part).

Unfortunately, as with too many of the Suzanne Lacy events, these performances seem always about her, rather than about the ostensible goals of the piece. I still remember with horror the first piece by her I saw staged, “Whisper the Wind, the Waves,” presented in the La Jolla coves in 1984. More than one hundred fifty women over the age of sixty five, all dressed in white clothes of their own choosing, were asked to descend very steep stairs to the strand, where white tables and chairs had been set up for them. At these tables they were to talk about aging. Unfortunately, there were no umbrellas and no water provided that I saw. The unbearable heat of the midday sun and the intense effort required to descend the steps caused real problems for some performers; many were overcome by the heat as the event progressed. Some were unable to ascend the steps without medical assistance. Furthermore, the sunburn a number later suffered from such exposure was catastrophic. Of course, none of this showed up in the photos and the films of the event, only praise for Ms Lacy. Perhaps she and Ms Abranović should collaborate on a piece in which they discuss the future of the world forever, with no spectators. Maybe the energy generated would restore the earth to a prelapsarian state.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Aaron Curry at Lincoln Center

 
With the completion of the renovation of much of its campus, Lincoln Center has returned to presenting sculpture on the main plaza. For the Fall season the Lincoln Center Art Committee, headed by Peter Kraus, commissioned Los Angeles-based artist Aaron Curry to create a series of sculptures for the space. The choice was made “with guidance from a Curatorial Advisory Working Group comprised of Richard Armstrong, Director, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and Foundation; Nicholas Baume, Director, Public Art Fund; Thelma Golden, Director, The Studio Museum in Harlem; Christian Rattemeyer, Associate Curator, The Museum of Modern Art; Scott Rothkopf, Curator, Whitney Museum of American Art; and Philippe Vergne, Director, Dia Art Foundation.
There are fourteen painted aluminum pieces of various heights and dimensions arranged around the fountain. The artist has stated that he “was immediately struck by the scale of the Plaza and its architecture. This led me to think about how I could engage the space, not compete with it, or try to overwhelm or obscure it, but rather activate it as an environment of sculpture. The concept of an interactive, almost performative installation began to develop. I became excited by the idea of placing several sculptures throughout the Plaza so that the visiting public could move among the works, experiencing them directly as part of the given environment. Giacometti’s unrealized project for Chase Manhattan Plaza is something of a touchstone here, but so are the designs for theater and ballet of Picasso and Matisse. It occurred to me that an arrangement of sculptures at Josie Robertson Plaza could echo what occurs on stage: the sculptures can be understood simultaneously as characters and as being the setting for some event.”
The artist himself was born in San Antonio, Texas, in 1972 and received a BFA from the Art Institute of Chicago and an MFA from the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena. In 2010 he was a fellow at The American Academy in Berlin. Curry is represented by the Michael Werner Gallery, which has branches in New York, London, and Berlin. If I list all these prestigious names and connections it is only to indicate the kind of institutional support that this site-specific installation, “Melt to Earth” (7 October 2013-6 January 2014), has supporting it. The biomorphic pieces are whimsical, even fun, but they in no way challenge the viewer or even demand thought.

They are basically flat aluminum plates, cut and painted; they look like crude paper cut-outs translated into metal with paint thrown on them. The bases are also flat. The works lack three-dimensionality; they could just as easily be wall-mounted pieces, And the paint, in the kinds of bright, indeed garish, colors of cartoons, emphasizes this flatness. In fact, the works could easily be stills from an animation. They are playful, easily legible as “art,” but to what purpose? They lack resonance, a sense of something beyond immediate pleasure. This is art by committee, I am afraid, like so much of the non-performance-based art shown at the various constituents of Lincoln Center. The celebrity artists, for instance, chosen for Gallery Met, whatever their talents, seem to produce inferior work for the space there; and they clearly have been chosen as much for name value as for their ability to create themed work. If the Art Committee wanted a celebrity, perhaps they should have considered Mark di Suvero, whose work both amuses and challenges. Or they could have chosen older artists of lesser fame, but no less importance, like Richard Nonas or Hans Van de Bovenkamp or Herbert Ferber. Such a lost opportunity.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Connoisseurs, Curators and Other Frauds

 Once again in the papers this week, both here and in Europe, there have been lengthy accounts of the supposed discovery of a Van Gogh, “Sunset at Montmajour,” painted during the artist’s residency in Arles. And once again this is a painting, discovered in an attic, of course, that had been described as a fake—and by no less than a French ambassador to Sweden. The Danish owner at the time, the Norwegian steel producer Nicolai Christian Mustad then supposedly banished the work to an attic, where it remained until after the industrialist’s death in 1970. Isn’t it wonderful to know that there were collectors a century ago just as concerned with the name of the artist, as opposed to the effect of the work, as there are today. Certainly, as Jerry Saltz has been screaming lately, no one buys a Jeff Koons for the beauty (can one even speak of a Koons in such terms?) of the object, but for the importance of the name and the trophy price. With the Van Gogh there are the breathless claims that this adds not only a new piece to the Van Gogh catalogue, but fills a major lacuna in the understanding of the greatest period in his development. And it may even be worth more than $50 million. Supposedly the painting was brought to the Van Gogh Museum by a new owner in 1991, but was declared a fake; then in 2011 museum officials supposedly had a change of heart and decided to examine the work again and declared it a real Van Gogh, after scientific analysis of the pigments. They claimed it to be an experimental work with which Van Gogh was not satisfied, but that it had belonged after his death to his brother Theo. Nowhere was there any real discussion of whether the picture was any better than any Van Gogh imitation in a flea market on the Seine.

All of this should be quite amusing for those without $50 million to spare, but it points up the real problem with this authentication. It is totally subjective, even when pigments, canvas, and so on are consistent with the practice of the artist being examined. Absent an accession catalogue prepared as the artist is working, there is no real guarantee that any work is authentic even with a signature and a certificate of authenticity (maybe a fingerprint on the work would be acceptable, but this is extremely rare). And certainly as the ongoing Knoedler case demonstrates all too well, the reputation of the gallery purveying a work is sadly no guarantee. (The perpetrator of this fraud, Glafira Rosales, has just pleaded guilty to the charges brought against her in Federal Court. But Knoedler has already been destroyed, and its former president, Anne Freedman, has seen her reputation shattered. In fact, she has filed a libel suit against one dealer who faulted her for failing to vet the works Rosales provided to her; but she had showed them to a number of major curators and even the former head of the National Gallery, who seem to have approved them.)  

While connoisseurship was the rage for several generations through the first decades of the last century, it has been replaced now by “curatorship” as the operative educational/collection mode. Connoisseurs were supposedly able, by their training and their “eye,” to determine the authenticity of the work. Like graphologists (another pseudo-science), they were thought to have attained a superior ability to recognize characteristics of an artist’s style and apply that to contested works. The addition of computers to the equation was supposed to validate this, but of course the computers can recognize only was has been input—not unlike the great valuators of the past century.

Modern curators are taught--in what is truly a development as specious as connoisseurship--how to come up with ideas for exhibitions—concepts to unite the disparate. The work is always secondary to the idea. In both cases, however, the operative mode is money, the validation of the work by its placement within the right collection or exhibition venue or the fee paid for the valuation or exhibition. And it is money, of course, which has forced most so-called experts at attribution to stop providing evaluations; even if there is a written agreement that the opinion given is not subject to litigation, the circumstances are; no expert can ever really be sure that a judgment will not be subjected to the law courts. After repeated lawsuits, for instance, the Warhol authentication board had to stop issuing rulings; the litigation was eating up its funds. And Twombly foundation members have been accused of exaggerating the value of the genuine holdings in the artist’s estate in order to increase their own management fees. For curators, the problem is including works from certain collections or creating exhibitions, like a current solo revival at a major uptown museum in New York, that can cover exhibition costs. They also need to generate art loan agreements and donations from the right collectors or trustees for the entire process. This includes all those corporate sponsorships, really just advertisement by another name, what PBS calls ever so smugly “underwriting.”

Monday, September 16, 2013

The 2013 Art Season Begins


A new art seasons began a few days back, one that promises some of the most important shows in many years and that has already seen the closing of many galleries. All across the art capitals of London, Berlin, and New York, there is a palpable fear in the air among smaller and younger dealers about what the future may bring. From its high of over 370 galleries in Chelsea alone, New York has lost at least 40 galleries and more than 100 have closed in Chelsea over the last two years, a demise brought on by the triumph of the franchise dealers and mega-mall spaces of the likes of Zwirner, Gagosian, White Cube and their ilk (and the astronomical rents they can pay). If a gallery does not have a physical space on at least two or three continents, it is almost considered inconsequential. Just now Paris-based Perrotin has announced the forthcoming debut of its New York Gallery in an old Bank of New York Federal-style building on Madison and 73rd Street; interestingly, one of its directors will be Lucien Terras, a pioneer in Chelsea, who will be handling its museum and institutional sales. (I first met Lucien when he was working, with Tony Feher, whose career he launched, at Paula Cooper’s space on Wooster Street.) Marian Goodman, who has long had galleries in New York and Paris, has just signed a lease for a very large space in London off Piccadilly Circus, while the Berlin dealer Max Hetzler is opening two new venues in Berlin and one in Paris.

Perhaps the most pernicious, if least discussed, aspect of the rapid change in the promotion and sale of contemporary art has been the rise of the PR firm as a major component of the process. While museums and other arts institutions have long had in-house media and public relations operations and have occasionally used outside public relations firms to handle exhibitions for which a big box-office is expected or for which a major donor is paying, this has not been true for commercial galleries. They have generally used mailings and phone calls made to select clients to generate buzz and sales. The rise of email and art event sites has allowed even the smallest galleries to publicize their openings widely, in hopes of drawing both crowds and clients---and, of course, the critics from The Times. The public relations firms now control how and when and even by whom articles and reviews can be done; they will even refuse to offer any help, including images, to small publications, if they think The Times wants first rights. And there are even pop-up exhibitions that exist only through and for publicity, with the names of the models and celebrities in attendance getting far more notice than the works on display. Julian Schnabel’s son Vito ws one of the first—while still a teenager—to do this kind of pup-up gallery, but he reestablished the careers of a number of older artists, like Ron Gorshov. The same cannot be said for Vladimir Restoin Roitfeld, whose exhibitions seem to exist in a world in which the prime motivation is fashion celebrity—like the breathless and very controlled reports from the front lines of the party circuit at the art fairs.

Some of the galleries that have been forced to leave Chelsea because of rising rents and building sales have taken over spaces on lower Orchard Street, the heart of the Lower East Side of Manhattan, that have been abandoned by the pioneers there, as they seek larger venues on parallel streets. Perhaps the most interesting of this group is Monya Rowe, whose second floor space on West 22nd Street was no longer available. The peripatetic DCKT alighted in late Spring in the former space of Nicelle Beuachene, who shares a building on Broome Street with Jack Hanley. The two actually alternate using the ground floor, which must have posed a bit of a problem during Ms Beauchene’s pregnancy this summer.

Among the closings I most lament, over the past few months, are Anna Kustera, Newman Popiashvili, and Harris Lieberman, each of which carried real personality and creative vision to the task of selling art. From its early days in an almost inaccessible aerie on Mercer Street, Newman Popiashvili  brought the unexpected to light, including, at one point, the skillful and macabre racing crash paintings and tornado scenes of Rover Feyer and, throughout its run, the psychologically powerful photographs of Mark Woods. And who can forget the time when, in their gallery on 22nd Street they lowered the ceiling so that you basically had to crawl to get to their office through the installation. Fortunately that was not during one of the times when the gallery flooded, especially during Hurricane Sandy last year.

Harris Lieberman in seven years presented some of the more innovative shows I saw, including works by Karl Haendel. Ohad Meromi, Matt Saunders, and Alexandre Singh. One of the really surprising works they sponsored was a lot-line wall mural by Haendel at the corner of Howard and Broadway in New York; watching it over the years as it aged and then as it was hidden by construction in the next door vacant lot—once the home of a flea market---was truly a great New York art experience. I wonder if it will reappear again in a hundred years if the new building is demolished.

Anna Kustera has long been one of my favorite dealers, perhaps the most innovative I have known. And I have known her from the time when she was the assistant to Josh Baer in his enormous space on Broome Street. With shows as diverse as the first-generation feminist artist Mimi Smith and the "bomb-maker" Gregory Green, she has challenged our ideas of what the historical paradigm should be. And she showcased artists of all backgrounds, allowing them to do things that did not fit the official line of ethnic or politically engaged art. She has said she is looking, like a number of other dealers, including Casey Kaplan, (long her neighbor across 21st St), for a new location, without the ridiculous overhead of Chelsea and now, unfortunately, much of the Lower East Side.