Previous: The Inner Economist leaves the museum (3)
Roundup
Post #1064 • September 28, 2007, 7:21 AM • 9 Comments
Roberta Smith reviews the Muriel Kallis Steinberg Newman Collection at the Metropolitan Museum in the form of an audio slideshow.
"Either you are sophisticated or cynical enough to gush over the emperor's wonderfully postmodern and transgressive new duds, or you are one of those reactionary rubes who get all hung up on the fact that the emperor actually happens to be naked." (Necee)
Wall animation. (NW)
Now that the New York Times tore down their paywalls, Maira Kalman's column has become freely available, I happily report.
"Art is on the plate at five top spots [in Paris] where the views are as fine as the food, and you can keep the security guards up late." Sigh.
Human Flipbook. (Drawn!) Also via Drawn!, 52 Comic Challenges.
"You have to eat well, be well housed, have a screw from time to time, smoke your pipe and drink your coffee in peace." - Van Gogh. (Reddit)
"Do I regret anything? Yes, I regret laying out £6.95 for a copy of Artforum ." (AJ)
Reason comes in with the winner for the blog post title of the week.
"I believe in protecting open land on almost any pretext and surely the dunes of South Truro deserve to be protected because they are part of the larger ecosystem of the Cape Cod National Seashore. What puzzles me is the idea of the Hopper landscape. The landscape Hopper saw, as an artist, is already protected. It exists only in his paintings, nowhere else."
"After a chance meeting with Lucian Freud, art handler Ria Kirby agreed to sit for him - a huge commitment which was to last for 16 months, seven nights a week, on top of her day job." (AJ)
Department of Skills: Michael Conley. (Kottke, who also linked to this Marcel Marceau video from Mel Brooks's Silent Movie. RIP Marceau.)
2.
September 28, 2007, 12:46 PM
Couldn't ask for a better review of Bannard's recent show in New York in the current Art in America.
Congratulations!
3.
September 29, 2007, 6:59 AM
Thanks, beWare
4.
September 29, 2007, 7:38 AM
Can we get a link, or a re-posting, of the Bannard review here, Franklin?
I just hope a J.J. wrote it, so I can read it...
5.
September 29, 2007, 7:42 AM
The AiA website pretty much doesn't do anything. Let me ask them for permission and see what we get.
6.
September 29, 2007, 8:09 AM
JJ #1 seems to be a columnist, Marc, so I don't think he will be writing about art regularly, alas.
JJ #2 seems to be having a wrestling match between his eye and his "education", and carraying it on in public, which is a rare and courageous thing to do. I hope the eye wins.
7.
September 29, 2007, 2:42 PM
Jacoby is completely on target, but of course he'll be dismissed as an ignorant outsider who simply doesn't get it and should be writing about something else, like sports. Still, it's nice to see somebody hit the bull's eye in print. It only makes "real" art critics look that much more effete (to put it kindly).
Unfortunately, things are too far gone, and the ludicrous success of Creed's quackery (which is exactly what it is) is a perfect case in point. I have no respect whatsoever for Creed, the Turner Prize crowd, Roberta Smith or any publication which would foist such a worthless critic on me. They are all beyond laughable, and since they either don't know that or, more likely, don't care, all they deserve is contempt.
8.
September 30, 2007, 2:22 PM
Oh god how I hate that phrase and all it represents; art critic.
Critics. A profession akin to lawyers. Someone who invents a niche for themselves in order to enliven their own empty space. YuK
Now, down the road from me, there is a fish critic. He, on the other hand, has a real role in the world. When a fish is not 'up to scratch', he wastes no time dissecting it. He pops it in the pan unfilleted.
Pip pip!
9.
September 30, 2007, 5:11 PM
That's real cute, Geoff, but it makes no sense. We do our best to make sense here.
1.
Marc Country
September 28, 2007, 8:59 AM
From now on, I will only read art criticism from people with the intitals J.J...