I actually liked this show of oils more than his previous paper work, although most people disagree. The show was possibly overhung, but Zwirner is a big place for small paintings! I like his strange beings rambling though a glowing non-space that he creates - a surreal-existentialism if you will. It's his own language, which you might or might not feel is accessible. I didn't start out a big fan. But I'm somewhat coming around. I think the work is for real.
*If someone says something that you really don't like on this blog, maybe just ignore them...
i can't help but like his work - the creatures and environs are just too much fun - but also resonant to me. bb, i do think it is for real.
my only qualm is that his work suffers from a bit of 'sameness' from one piece to the next - i wish the vocubulary was wider in the creatures and in the paint handling, size, etc. just to mix it up and keep it interesting. there was so much visual info in the last show - so many drawings that it was really overwhelming and i lost interest at a certain point. sadly. they all seemed to blend into one another a bit? i am curious to see where the work will go. i'm not sure about the sculpture.
painter, I haven't seen this work in person. Initially the cuteness and preciousness bugged me -- but come to find that his imagery is laden with dark political content. Like a loaded gun made out of candy - I like.
yes fb, that was my problem too. 3 or 4 in a room = greatness, but that last show kind of negated the individualism of each piece b/c there were so many! There should have been half the amount there were, or a few different sizes or something...
sorry to post a zillion times... but do others think dzama suffers from a kind of over-exposure. i remember the armory last year it seemed like his drawings were in every other booth, evey time you turned the corner.
I love his work. I have an older drawing of his from 98 or 99 that's some bear-y thing shooting a tv. I love his gleeful perversity combined with his very proper children's book illustration style.
okay, I was wrong... there is no political content in this work; some of it just has that "look." Maybe that kind of bugs me, that he is playing with genres that he doesn't really occupy?
i think that overexposure can also make the work suffer. for example if you have more commitments for shows than time to make work, this can really affect the quality of what you put out and compromise things quite a bit. this happens all the time. 2 recent dissappointments were tal r and dana schutz at contemporary fine arts in berlin. both of these artists, i love but these 2005 shows were thin AND over hung.
They are (or were) cheap and small AND popular, so it's no surprise that they were everywhere at one point.
The cuteness thing doesn't bother me as much in the paintings for some reason. I see it more as lifting and recombining old comic or graphic images for the purposes of saying what he wants to say - his language is relatively cute items. I feel like it transforms into something about underlying personal urges. And what not. Neo Rauch does the same thing, but his work feel political, not personal.
I feel the same way about this work as i do someone like Amy cutler, in another day and age, they would have been successful childrens book illustrators. i really do not think they are doing anything different than illustrators, its just the context which has changed, and people read so much into it.
snore, another marcel dzama that looks exactly like every other dzama i've ever seen. i first saw his work when i was in grad school in chicago. i used to live next door to his old gallery called ten in one (now gone i think) and i swear to god these pictures haven't changed since then. this was literally 9 years ago. the most exciting time for him is when he starting making paintings and not works on paper. they were terrible in a good way...unresolved, not confident and problematic. now it's just more of the same. what i do find interesting is how they skate the line between commercial images that can be on a greeting card or a coffee mug. actually i think i've seen one on a coffee mug...or a t-shirt perhaps. not sure. i think i like his sculpture better. at the end of the day, his world was fun and new but is now tiring and needs a change.
The illustration question is constantly coming up; the boundaries have certainly been blurred, but not entirely collapsed. You won't see New Yorker cartoonists showing at a gallery that shows "fine art," but you might see Chris Ware, because his work comes closer to that blurry line. I think it's fine to use "illustrational" as part of a critique, although some illustrational artists are capable of transcending the category.
Re: Amy cutler, for example, there was one picture of girls pulling a house by their braided hair. Not a bad "weird" image, but one that didn't resonate with me. I mean, for example, how about braided pubic or nose hair? Thats just an example of how to turn up the weird - even if its not "honest" like "I really want to braid my nose hair" I dont think it has to be "felt" to be good.
Then there is Hillary Harkness - I'm not into that imagery either - not weird/symbolic enough - still not bad - but turn it up!
I like landscapes, cutaway views -more Henry Darger, less Mother Goose.
painter, does he have a show up now? let's talk about zwirner painters! also, do you ever post painters outside of new york? there's some interesting things happening in young LA right now.
I think Painter does a great job with variety. Also, I am glad to see the likes of BB, WW, FB, GPD, Sloth, and others raising the bar in this forum from where it devolved to yesterday. BB makes a good point about ignoring...
I think this site needs a little more variety in the type of work posted. Chelsea is bad enough as it is, and this is just the same stuff we see over and over again.
yeah, me too. painter is great. that hilo chen image really threw us for a loop yesterday. i thought about about those nipples all the way home yesterday.
let's talk about zwirner painters! i am the expert as i write all the press releases and have to read every catalog over and over and over.
hmmm... i was still working at daniel reich during happy days. are you in ny, or do you know the cali/kordansky folks?
i like jockum's and mamma's paintings. lisa is soo friendly and cool. neo is dreamy. luc is intense but sweet. marcel is so generous. isa is a fucking genius. just met sue williams and she seems super cool. looking forward to meeting michael borremans.
Wow, you get to meet all the superstars. I have met a couple in my day and they are all just as spastic as the rest of us. Gives me comfort somehow. I love Neo Rauch. I am definitely on his team. Even though he doesn't know it.
What is the deal with Pettibon? Why does he keeping doing the same thing over and over too? Except even worse than Dzama. It used to seem so revolutionary, but now, I am just bored. Is this the fate of all successful artists? Is it the same as what happens with bands?
what about the other Royal Art Lodgers? That show at the Drawing Center was excellent in my opinion, albeit, somewhat 'illustrational' in nature. Almost more interesting as a performance like the Gelatin show.
hey, ww, sue williams went to zwirner?? i thought she went to cheim and read! that's interesting news!
meanwhile to the other anon: stop being so mean to hey mayberry. he has opinions and that's just FINE. you told him to fuck off and now referring to his exes: it's negative. everyone is obviously STRIVING to be on the up and up today!!! let's keep it going on a more positive note.
moving on: i think dzama is interesting in relation to nordstrom because dzama falls short of the coolness of nordstom, wierdly, even though nordstrom is (i guess?) really a famous children's book illustrator in sweden. but dzama seems way more illustrationy. i say this even though from his first zwirner show i bought one.. they were only $350!
i think it would be interesting to post Yuskavage after chen. maybe it's a little hard to flip from one thing to the next. i was not interested in chen's work at all so the posts, though contentious, left me flat. but the comparison of subject matter between chen and yuskavage would be great. subject matter is similar but chen's actual painting is super boring to me while hers is luscious. i dont want to get off on a tangent from yesterday but you know what i mean about sequence? maybe we could build on something here. one thread: sex subject matter. another thread: the illustration problem. a third: the materiality of acrylic. etc etc.
dzama in relation to JOCKUM NORDSTROM a painter from sweden who shows at zwirner and is married to mamma anderson, also a painter from sweden who shows at zwirner
w.w. yes, i'm in NY. hmm, if you weren't at zwirner during the happy show then we haven't met. i show with an LA gallery so yeah, i know david kordansky quite well, he's a good friend of mine. i'm into his girlfriend mindy shapero's work up at helwing gallery right now. her works on paper are totally zonked and great. check it out: http://www.annahelwinggallery.com/HELWING/shapero4.html
rumor has it a pretty cool young painter is next door at sandroni/rey as well...curious about that.
last anon: Eisenman is a complete and utter bad ass...she blows my mind. previous anon: it's ok, the other anon is right but they don't think it privately...they just come right out and say it! i just can't hold on to em. jeeze, $350? i'm thinking of buying one myself!
eisenmann rocks!!!!! she is the furthest from a snoozer as you can get. yuskavage after chen would have been great! sue williams is at zwirner now! her last show didn't do it for me, i'm a big fan of her career overall. didn't Painter already post ruth root?
You sound like you're more partial to abstraction. Charlene Von Heyl makes abstract expressionism seem vital. That's a pretty cool feat. James Hyde - somehow I'd consider him more in the sculpture realm. Charlene's show opens next week. Will Painter re-post or is it too soon after the brown squish we saw a few weeks ago?
I felt sad after Sue Williams last show. I think her career has been incredible, an inspiration for constantly evolving and changing, but it seems like she got stuck in some static version of herself from 5 years ago.
His sculptures didn't work so well. maybe the ones in the big room were meant to look like prefabricated action figures. I liked the home made outfits in the front. The back ones looked like they weren't made by him. I went to see his show twice.
poor dzama, we already forgot him. anyway, i think there's great energy in the work, it just needs to transform more. there has to be more interesting things happening around or in his life. he's been making the same imagery for over a decade now.
this is my work. i'm gathering info on dzama. plus i'm multitasking, and this is free PR for the gallery. pretty soon blog posts will make it into the press files. um. maybe.
maybe sue williams will go ballzout now that she's with dz!!!
to anon: maybe. Essenhigh's early work. who else? really there's a lot of everything. re: eisenman, the stuff i've seen just doesn't seem that funny and i feel like funny is the point. i might get killed for this, but i thought sean landers was much funnier in his prime. They're both kind of gen X blowhards now... and Phillip Pearlstein??? That's NOT a snoozer? Come on!
I wish I could be a manatee. Hey Mayberry I like your point about Dzama, it seems most people agree that he needs to get more ambitious or something. The imagery sucks you in but then becomes boring when seen in large groups like in his last show. I just showed some Dzama to my drawing class today. I think they are surprised that this kind of work is actually an option. They are just getting to know contemporary painters, maybe I should tell them about this blog....
As for humor, pretty much everything WW says cracks me up. Are you good in front of crowds? I feel that you could do stand-up or at least be in a sketch comedy group.
I know what could be more snoozy than Philip Pearlstein. Fred...why?
Nicole Eisenman's newer paintings are unbelievably good, I can't wait for her show. Have you looked at the more recent stuff, BB, on the Koenig website? I saw a painting of hers recently in a group show or some benefit type of thing - I couldn't believe it was hers at first, it was so different from her 90's stuff.
w.w., did I mention that not only are you very funny, but you have the most excellent grammar on this blog, and you're just really a lovely person in general?
I was? I didn't think WW was in the position to help me get into Zwirner but WW are you? Can you work me into the roster? I'll give you five bucks and be really really nicey pants.
w.w.: i wasn't a prick! i was stating an opinion. i'm sorry if i came across harshly, i already aplogized for that! i'm actually a sweet person when you get to know me...ask amy. ok, not cool..someone is posting as me. the post that says: "I am schizophrenic, w.w." is a faker.
wow, i'm flattered, people posting as me. i think this is a good sign! w.w.: my name is John and if you read the post about helwing carefully, you'll see who i am. i'd love to know who manatee and mountain man are.
Hey Mayberry, if you come to my blog you'll be able to figure it out if you really want to. I posted some of my own work recently. The clues are there. I hope this isn't an invitation for a shitstorm to rain down upon me.
mountain man, i'd love to come to your blog. i think we have friends in common? i'll check it out now. whoa- judging by that parmigianino you posted, i think you and i are a match. christ, you listen to TG as well! i'm listening to "nothing short of a total war" right this second...
eisenman, davie, apfelbaum, linhares, all great. curious why you harshed out on sillman given that group but PLEASE: dont answer, we just got the blog out of a bad place.
I really don't think I was being harsh. It is hard when someone just can't see what the majority is seeing. I won't expound on it, but I don't think she is a strog painter. Her earlier work seemed to know better what it wanted to be.
steve dibenedetto is so interesting, i can see why she wants to post it again. his work would provoke much discussion. it's sort of hideous, and sort of amazing, and sort of overdone, and sort of unlike anyone else's and therefore pretty cool. i cant decide if i like or hate and would love to know what others think.
I am curious to know what people think of his work. I loved his huge painting in that Whitney show - Remote Visions, was that what it was called? I love his drawings too. His show was good, I thought, but I was underwhelmed after having been overwhelmed by how great that huge one was. I don't understand why there has to always be a helicopter and a squid in every work. I wish there were more images. I am a fan of his work but would like to know what other people think and refine my own opinions more. That's all. There is something really productive in all this hashing out.
I like his work too. But sometimes they feel too contained. They are hideous but also really fun to look at, there is so much visual information, really dense. That part I like. I think I like the ugliness of them, but maybe I wish there was more gesture or more movement somehow.
ok, someone posted as me twice during my 45 minute commute. It's freakin' me out man! You don't know me w.w. - as far as I know. But I like your brand of 'tough love.' And there's only one thing I grease regularly. My bike. Good group today. I don't know if Marcel got anything out of it, but oh well...
Wow the trajectory here is kind of scary. I've been lurking on this blog for the whole time without ever making a comment, but here it is. In the last few weeks it has become an insane number of comments, a number of them unproductive insults or arguments, AND now people posting as other people. is this blog falling apart? that would make me sad. On the other hand a lot of new people are coming on regularly and talking honestly. So i hope it keeps on it's track.
Please, no insults, no pretending to be someone else! That is baby stuff. Arguing and even rage is fine but not directed at someone you don't even know. Just make up your own name, don't be someone else, what is the point?
there are some moments in dibenedetto's work that are truly beautiful passages of paint but the repetition of imagery kind of bugs me because it is too obvious a reference to pot smoking culture. we don't need every painting to have a helicopter, especially if the space in the helicopter painting already references the whirly world of the helicopter propellers or the biomorphic world of the squid.
GPD: couldn't have said it better. I need an explanation for the constant re-picturing of the iconic squid and helicopter. The closest I ever read was a Jerry Saltz review from a few years ago where he referred to DiBenedetto's paintings as Vietnam flashbacks. That made total sense. But still, I don't see why he doesn't expand the content.
I agree GPD. DiBenedetto really has nice moments, but i have no idea what his paintings are about, except that he likes swirly circular things. Has anyone mentioned Tom Nozkowski yet? Too formal?
I love Nozkowski. Would love to see him here. Not too formal at all in my opinion - I think he's one of the most inventive painters around. I'm glad you brought him up.
Larissa Bates Bill Komoski Gary Stephan Sharon Horvath Natasha Sweeten Richmond Burton Elizabeth Huey Whitney Bedford Giles Lyon Michael Lazarus Gina Magid
the comments on this blog are helpful in reminding me that art, if it ever was, is no longer the domain of intellectuals. broccoli and rice! guess my identity! steve benedetto, what's his work about, why the helicopters, the squids. i imagine his work is about steve benedetto. why is there such a frantic desire to pull every element out of the work and into some cohesive object. on one hand people here, like most painters, value work that is unresolved, partly flawed, insecure, but then when the work is too arcane, there are probing questions. people like hey mayberry seem to think that painting should be some race towards contemporaneity. hilo chen should be ashamed of his retrograde tit paintings. why? why does it matter. damien loeb would be much more easily excoriated , if only because he's a pretty boy and his work is empty. i dont know. it seems like this place attracts people 'in the scene' so it would be my instict to be gentle, because you never know who is reading it. i value work that is personal and honest. in all media and bearing all kinds of appearances. so much bitterness, so many entries. why not make some work and learn to be quiet?
nozkowski was my professor in grad school. he was amazing. talk about tough love. dibenedetto taught there too (rutgers) but i didn't get to take a class with him. he had cult status. he showed a little painting in a faculty show that blew my mind.
Yeah, he can blow you away, WW. That's what happened to me at the Whitney. And anon. your comment is thoughtful, but why on earth should we be quiet? Painting and silence are not always meant to be together.
i always liked sharon horvath. she deserves more visibility. she has a beautiful hand.
i like dibenedetto because he isn't afraid to make ugly things. the helicopters confused me for a while, but then i just embraced them. they seem very genuine.
Yeah they do seem genuine, Steve's helicopter and squid, but I wish there were more genuine images to see in addition. Sharon Horvath's work is elegant and beautiful. So many painters to post.
PaintersNYC is a real good online source of current painting, which painter should continue to facilitate.
Seems I mistook the comments section as a place where its denizens would welcome a range of critical observations regarding art and ideas with open arms and debate them when necessary.
I broke some unwritten rules of the clique, though, huh? Wrote longish posts; pointed out humourless gibberish - sensitive blokes around here.
Since I hurt blogger feelings and offended chatroom sensibilities, only vague presumptuous one-liners from here on in.
Nah, I'll try again, less candidly. Dzama's makes a good jpeg image, looks like a good painting. The ski masks are a cheap way out of the difficulty of painting tiny little faces - the scale of facial details would've helped the work, I think. Period.
Thomas Nozkowski - Yes. I remember first seeing one of his paintings in maybe 1986/87 at a group show at Jessica Berwind Gallery in Philadelphia.
Isn't it nice when you can remember the VERY FIRST time you encountered an artist's work? I mean someone whose name you hadn't heard of at all at that point, but who goes on to become fairly well-known? I got to meet him finally at his 2003 Protetch opening.
Mindy Shapero - mentioned by Hey Mayberry - very much liked her two pieces in Anna Helwing's booth at Art Basel. I wrote something on my blog, but didn't get any pictures.
It was good to see the big Sue Williams piece there (in Miami), which I was surprised to enjoy after hearing so many bad things about her last show. Or maybe it was a case of lowered expectations?
Holly Dzama was just included in a show here in Richmond. She had a couple very small and very very bad paintings, some kind of book which I didn't look at, and a crocheted neckwarmer and mittens - all tacked to the wall. The crocheted stuff wasn't at all Dzama-fied, like his salt shakers and that shit, just regular crochet.
Burrito Brother - I'm glad to read that it was not really you making some of those comments.
Yeah me too, I thought Burrito Brother was an a-hole for a second.
Martin, I agree about the Sue Williams - I saw it at Art Basel and thought it was great. But I was also under the impression that her work had taken a turn for the worse.
No one cares, IMO whether you're a decent person. This post is about Marcel Dzama, who is an influential painter from my home city of Winnipeg. His work may veer into illustration but I think the immediacy and imagination of his work is what makes him so popular. That and the fact that he mixes root beer in with his paint.
I'd love to talk about Nozkowski sometime, and many others on those lists (minus Rick Schroeder)but as far as Marcel goes: I think we have a very 'process' oriented crowd here, and maybe that's why the more illustrational artists like marcel don't fly. As far as Ridley Howard goes, I don't really see it as the same thing - he doesn't touch on surrealism at all. I wonder what people think of Neil Farber also of the RAL. His work is very cute as well, cuter even, but his last show was more about silly process like drawing tiny faces on paint blobs.
I dont' know if you can generalize about the crowd here in that way. If we are talking Winnipeg artists, my personal fave is Jon Pylypchuck or however you spell it. But honestly it is good to remember the root beer when it comes to Dzama and like Martin says, the first time you see an artist is a special thing - I definitely had a crush on Dzama's work, it just didn't turn into that long term relationship. But I hold out hope, the guy is so inventive when it comes to imagery and his oil paintings are very delightful.
And I do hope we get a chance to discuss Nozkowski.
Dear fellow art geeks, nighty night. Have you all heard the song by Art Brut "Modern Art...makes me...want to rock out..." It's an anthem.
PS - BB, I just meant I don't think you can generalize that this is a "process" crowd. I think it's mixed up and depends on the artist. There is formalist critique, awareness of process but also interest and concern about subject matter. At least to me it seems somewhat balanced. I am sure there are more voices that are needed, but anyway. I am against generalizing. No offense.
I'd take Pylypchuk over Farber. Who is whose uncle? Isn't there some intermixing here? Holly seems to be holding up the rear. The Royal Art Lodge show at the drawing center held a lot of promise for playful collaborative spirit. I love the idea of what they were doing. I wish people got together all the time to make drawings - it seems like the most fun artists could possibly have in each other's company, but there was no magnum opus, no culmination of greatness, just little hints here and there. I had hoped for more, personally.
I had hoped for more too actually. There was so much positive exciting energy in that show but the results were so mediocre. Made me wish I could watch them make art as a performance - I wish there was a video of their collaborative efforts, it would have emphasized the playfulness and invention. I did love it though, that drawing center show.
Yes JP is pretty great. His last show didn't wow me as much as usual, but still great. Sorry to generalize. Sometimes it has to be done. And Holly Dz. is also by far the youngest, so cut some slack! I'm off to the studio and then bed. Any more BB insight from now on is fake and should be completely disregarded...
What's wrong with Gina Magid? I hate really anomisity-filled anonymous comments. She's a great painter. I hear tell she has a show coming up. Sorry to everyone, I am under the weather and blogging is my pillow and mattress for the evenings. I promise to go away soon.
Gina Magid's paintings are loose, free, full of ADD but reinforced with skills. I feel them. I like them. Make a point instead of dissing it.
Wow I really butchered that word - anomosity? Is that how you spell it? I better get hence to bed before any more grievous spelling errors occur. Thanks for the fun forum once again, Painter. I love talking to and against all of you.
I made some pasta - turned out really nice, cream, egg, garlic, onion and so on and so forth. One thing - illustration in general is cheaper to produce...just a thought.
I like piss, blood, beer and ash in the medium, personally.
ok, one more real burrito post before bed. The 'don't be so tough' was not me. Gina Magid's a great artist! She has 2 nice paintings right now in a show at Sandra Gering. I don't think I've ever seen her work in an art mag... Good night!
this is for bart, the posting above me...oh please. what does that even mean? people use art styles/language as a form of espression, hopefully. if someone doesnt draw "well" or have "skills" there is the possibility that there is a reason for this. that it is intentional. you know, like abstract expressionism was/is a LANGUAGE, for example. art is a visual language. the way someone draws or paints or whatever is in service of what they are trying to express/communicate.
what about cy twombly (or any number of post-classical artists from this century). did he have drawing "skills"? or do you think he should have drawn "better"?
I mean precisely that lolla. I mean her drawing does convey anything--it is just there and is not strengthening her intentions. It has very little to do with her project.
I saw some paintings on satin where everything was so suck into the fabric in a way that seemed completely unconsidered. If that's the look she was going for...fine, but it seemed from the imagery that she wanted to make a different statement and it was all falling away.
conflict of interests for me, but i'm curious to see what people say.
ReplyDeleteI actually liked this show of oils more than his previous paper work, although most people disagree. The show was possibly overhung, but Zwirner is a big place for small paintings!
ReplyDeleteI like his strange beings rambling though a glowing non-space that he creates - a surreal-existentialism if you will. It's his own language, which you might or might not feel is accessible. I didn't start out a big fan. But I'm somewhat coming around. I think the work is for real.
*If someone says something that you really don't like on this blog, maybe just ignore them...
BB, I like the oils better too.
ReplyDeleteI have been ignoring them.
i can't help but like his work - the creatures and environs are just too much fun - but also resonant to me. bb, i do think it is for real.
ReplyDeletemy only qualm is that his work suffers from a bit of 'sameness' from one piece to the next - i wish the vocubulary was wider in the creatures and in the paint handling, size, etc. just to mix it up and keep it interesting. there was so much visual info in the last show - so many drawings that it was really overwhelming and i lost interest at a certain point. sadly. they all seemed to blend into one another a bit? i am curious to see where the work will go. i'm not sure about the sculpture.
i can say that i think his work has definitely improved from his first show in what 1999/2000 at zwirner. so much more interesting now....
ReplyDeletepainter, I haven't seen this work in person. Initially the cuteness and preciousness bugged me -- but come to find that his imagery is laden with dark political content. Like a loaded gun made out of candy - I like.
ReplyDeleteyes fb, that was my problem too. 3 or 4 in a room = greatness, but that last show kind of negated the individualism of each piece b/c there were so many! There should have been half the amount there were, or a few different sizes or something...
ReplyDeleteyeah, what to do with cuteness. i think about this problem almost every day.
ReplyDeleteI like this, and I like THIS.
ReplyDeletesorry to post a zillion times... but do others think dzama suffers from a kind of over-exposure. i remember the armory last year it seemed like his drawings were in every other booth, evey time you turned the corner.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.artcritical.com/REVIEWPANEL/RP6/index.htm
ReplyDeleteIf anyone is interested in hearing what the critics said about his show.
FB, Me too. Cuteness, I love it and I am always trying to get away from it. I love Cuteoverload.com
ReplyDeletepainter, THANK YOU for the review panel link. I wish all art criticism came w/audio. totally great.
ReplyDeleteI love his work. I have an older drawing of his from 98 or 99 that's some bear-y thing shooting a tv. I love his gleeful perversity combined with his very proper children's book illustration style.
ReplyDeleteokay, I was wrong... there is no political content in this work; some of it just has that "look." Maybe that kind of bugs me, that he is playing with genres that he doesn't really occupy?
ReplyDeletesorry - still formulating opinion.
ReplyDeleteI think he is overexposed too. I actually like the drawings better than the oils.
ReplyDeleteHe is overexposed and that detracts from his work, but I am sure he is not crying about it.
ReplyDeleteoverexposure is more of a career problem than an art problem, no? just asking.
ReplyDeletei think that overexposure can also make the work suffer. for example if you have more commitments for shows than time to make work, this can really affect the quality of what you put out and compromise things quite a bit.
ReplyDeletethis happens all the time.
2 recent dissappointments were tal r and dana schutz at contemporary fine arts in berlin. both of these artists, i love but these 2005 shows were thin AND over hung.
They are (or were) cheap and small AND popular, so it's no surprise that they were everywhere at one point.
ReplyDeleteThe cuteness thing doesn't bother me as much in the paintings for some reason. I see it more as lifting and recombining old comic or graphic images for the purposes of saying what he wants to say - his language is relatively cute items. I feel like it transforms into something about underlying personal urges. And what not. Neo Rauch does the same thing, but his work feel political, not personal.
I feel the same way about this work as i do someone like Amy cutler, in another day and age, they would have been successful childrens book illustrators. i really do not think they are doing anything different than illustrators, its just the context which has changed, and people read so much into it.
ReplyDeletecomparing dzama to rauch? apples and oranges.
ReplyDeleteBut they are the same in that they lift old (50's, 60's, 70's) graphics to assemble their work...
ReplyDeleteNo?
hey painter, what about Ruth Root?
ReplyDeletesnore, another marcel dzama that looks exactly like every other dzama i've ever seen. i first saw his work when i was in grad school in chicago. i used to live next door to his old gallery called ten in one (now gone i think) and i swear to god these pictures haven't changed since then. this was literally 9 years ago. the most exciting time for him is when he starting making paintings and not works on paper. they were terrible in a good way...unresolved, not confident and problematic. now it's just more of the same. what i do find interesting is how they skate the line between commercial images that can be on a greeting card or a coffee mug. actually i think i've seen one on a coffee mug...or a t-shirt perhaps. not sure. i think i like his sculpture better. at the end of the day, his world was fun and new but is now tiring and needs a change.
ReplyDeleteThe illustration question is constantly coming up; the boundaries have certainly been blurred, but not entirely collapsed. You won't see New Yorker cartoonists showing at a gallery that shows "fine art," but you might see Chris Ware, because his work comes closer to that blurry line. I think it's fine to use "illustrational" as part of a critique, although some illustrational artists are capable of transcending the category.
ReplyDeleteRe: Amy cutler, for example, there was one picture of girls pulling a house by their braided hair. Not a bad "weird" image, but one that didn't resonate with me. I mean, for example, how about braided pubic or nose hair? Thats just an example of how to turn up the weird - even if its not "honest" like "I really want to braid my nose hair" I dont think it has to be "felt" to be good.
ReplyDeleteThen there is Hillary Harkness - I'm not into that imagery either - not weird/symbolic enough - still not bad - but turn it up!
I like landscapes, cutaway views -more Henry Darger, less Mother Goose.
painter, does he have a show up now? let's talk about zwirner painters! also, do you ever post painters outside of new york? there's some interesting things happening in young LA right now.
ReplyDelete'at the end of the day, his world was fun and new but is now tiring and needs a change.'
ReplyDeletemayberry, i have a feeling that's what every woman in your life has privately thought at one point or another. no?
I think Painter does a great job with variety. Also, I am glad to see the likes of BB, WW, FB, GPD, Sloth, and others raising the bar in this forum from where it devolved to yesterday. BB makes a good point about ignoring...
ReplyDeleteI think this site needs a little more variety in the type of work posted. Chelsea is bad enough as it is, and this is just the same stuff we see over and over again.
ReplyDeleteI have fallen deeply in love with Painter.
ReplyDeleteyeah, me too. painter is great. that hilo chen image really threw us for a loop yesterday. i thought about about those nipples all the way home yesterday.
ReplyDeletelet's talk about zwirner painters! i am the expert as i write all the press releases and have to read every catalog over and over and over.
w.w. are you a fan of daniel richter? you write the press releases for zwirner? i think i might know you.
ReplyDeletenot a big fan of d. richter. sorry. some of the older abstracts are more interesting, but...
ReplyDeletehave i met you?
most likely, some friends of mine were in the happy days show last year. if you're who i think you are, then yes, we've met!
ReplyDeleteWhat about the Lisa Yuskavage move? When is her show? That was newsy.
ReplyDeleteLet's see. Who else. Jockum Nordstrom is an incredible artist. Do you like him WW?
Ofili is there now too.
ReplyDeletehmmm... i was still working at daniel reich during happy days. are you in ny, or do you know the cali/kordansky folks?
ReplyDeletei like jockum's and mamma's paintings. lisa is soo friendly and cool. neo is dreamy. luc is intense but sweet. marcel is so generous. isa is a fucking genius. just met sue williams and she seems super cool. looking forward to meeting michael borremans.
wait a minute... Dzama is canadian. This is PaintersNYC! What the hell, Painter?
ReplyDeletedzama lives in new york.
ReplyDeleteWow, you get to meet all the superstars. I have met a couple in my day and they are all just as spastic as the rest of us. Gives me comfort somehow. I love Neo Rauch. I am definitely on his team. Even though he doesn't know it.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the deal with Pettibon? Why does he keeping doing the same thing over and over too? Except even worse than Dzama. It used to seem so revolutionary, but now, I am just bored. Is this the fate of all successful artists? Is it the same as what happens with bands?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
ReplyDeleteDoes Holly Dzama live in NYC too?
ReplyDeletewhat about the other Royal Art Lodgers?
ReplyDeleteThat show at the Drawing Center was excellent in my opinion, albeit, somewhat 'illustrational' in nature.
Almost more interesting as a performance like the Gelatin show.
hey, ww, sue williams went to zwirner?? i thought she went to cheim and read! that's interesting news!
ReplyDeletemeanwhile to the other anon: stop being so mean to hey mayberry. he has opinions and that's just FINE. you told him to fuck off and now referring to his exes: it's negative. everyone is obviously STRIVING to be on the up and up today!!! let's keep it going on a more positive note.
moving on: i think dzama is interesting in relation to nordstrom because dzama falls short of the coolness of nordstom, wierdly, even though nordstrom is (i guess?) really a famous children's book illustrator in sweden. but dzama seems way more illustrationy. i say this even though from his first zwirner show i bought one.. they were only $350!
I hope you re-post Inka Essenhigh, maybe when her show comes up - it's soon, right? I am curious to know what people think of her new work.
ReplyDeleteRuth Root is a good idea. Nicole Eisenman.
Ruth Root?? Please. She is so boring.
ReplyDeletei think it would be interesting to post Yuskavage after chen. maybe it's a little hard to flip from one thing to the next. i was not interested in chen's work at all so the posts, though contentious, left me flat. but the comparison of subject matter between chen and yuskavage would be great. subject matter is similar but chen's actual painting is super boring to me while hers is luscious. i dont want to get off on a tangent from yesterday but you know what i mean about sequence? maybe we could build on something here. one thread: sex subject matter. another thread: the illustration problem. a third: the materiality of acrylic. etc etc.
ReplyDeleteThey sel Dzama's work at Nordstroms?
ReplyDeleteI disagree. I think her work is odd and friendly.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Maureen Gallace?
ps i'm calling myself cookiepuss now so you can tell i'm not the other anonymous who i think is mean.
ReplyDeletei guess one anonymous is mean and the other isnt.
ReplyDeleteanyway now i'm cookiepuss.
Burrito Brother's quote:
ReplyDelete"strange beings rambling through a glowing non-space"
I tend to like this kind of thing myself, but think it's a very common approach. Don't you? Is it too common? I wonder.
dzama in relation to JOCKUM NORDSTROM a painter from sweden who shows at zwirner and is married to mamma anderson, also a painter from sweden who shows at zwirner
ReplyDeleteEisenmann is one of those painters that i wish i just liked more than i do... i guess what i'm saying is that i just don't really get it.
ReplyDeleteWhy are we only talking snoozers here?
ReplyDeletew.w. yes, i'm in NY. hmm, if you weren't at zwirner during the happy show then we haven't met. i show with an LA gallery so yeah, i know david kordansky quite well, he's a good friend of mine. i'm into his girlfriend mindy shapero's work up at helwing gallery right now. her works on paper are totally zonked and great. check it out:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.annahelwinggallery.com/HELWING/shapero4.html
rumor has it a pretty cool young painter is next door at sandroni/rey as well...curious about that.
last anon: Eisenman is a complete and utter bad ass...she blows my mind. previous anon: it's ok, the other anon is right but they don't think it privately...they just come right out and say it! i just can't hold on to em. jeeze, $350? i'm thinking of buying one myself!
Well then mention some non-snoozers. Like who is a non-snoozer to you Fred?
ReplyDeleteI really like Eisenman--a very smart and tough painter.
ReplyDeletehahaa, awesome.
ReplyDeleteI could've sworn I saw some Dzama's at Nordstroms. Or was it Lord and Taylors?
ReplyDeleteJames Hyde and Charlene Von Heyl.
ReplyDeleteeisenmann rocks!!!!! she is the furthest from a snoozer as you can get. yuskavage after chen would have been great! sue williams is at zwirner now! her last show didn't do it for me, i'm a big fan of her career overall. didn't Painter already post ruth root?
ReplyDeleteoops. eisenman. with one n.
ReplyDeleteYou sound like you're more partial to abstraction. Charlene Von Heyl makes abstract expressionism seem vital. That's a pretty cool feat. James Hyde - somehow I'd consider him more in the sculpture realm. Charlene's show opens next week. Will Painter re-post or is it too soon after the brown squish we saw a few weeks ago?
ReplyDeleteI like Patrick Ewing's work.
ReplyDeleteI felt sad after Sue Williams last show. I think her career has been incredible, an inspiration for constantly evolving and changing, but it seems like she got stuck in some static version of herself from 5 years ago.
ReplyDeletefred: i love that FAST ITALIAN MACHINE piece on hyde's web site. good stuff.
ReplyDeleteyeah, charlene von heyl. another kick ass painter. that show opens on the 18th.
ReplyDeleteI also love Marny Delvers. Beautiful paintings. She shows at Oliver Kamm I think.
ReplyDeleteLunchtime. So many tables.
ReplyDeleteback to Dzama - what did everyone think of his sculptures in the last show?
ReplyDeleteYes! Eisenman==Excellent.
ReplyDeleteI like all types of art. I also like Phillip Pearlstein.
ReplyDeleteI agree about Williams, although I like her figurative work much better than the loopy stuff.
ReplyDeleteHis sculptures didn't work so well. maybe the ones in the big room were meant to look like prefabricated action figures. I liked the home made outfits in the front. The back ones looked like they weren't made by him. I went to see his show twice.
ReplyDeleteHey w.w., get back to work.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone see the Jack Spellman show at Postmasters a few months back?
ReplyDeletepoor dzama, we already forgot him. anyway, i think there's great energy in the work, it just needs to transform more. there has to be more interesting things happening around or in his life. he's been making the same imagery for over a decade now.
ReplyDeleteI'm impressed with the quality of jokes today. Nordstrom's and David Zwirner, back to work - very funny stuff!
ReplyDeletethis is my work. i'm gathering info on dzama. plus i'm multitasking, and this is free PR for the gallery. pretty soon blog posts will make it into the press files. um. maybe.
ReplyDeletemaybe sue williams will go ballzout now that she's with dz!!!
hey painter
ReplyDeletei couldnt figure out that site you listed as the review of dzama on artcritical; can you give that URL again?
high five for jim hyde and charline von heyl! and nicole eisenman! all AWESOME and worth posting.
to anon: maybe. Essenhigh's early work. who else?
ReplyDeletereally there's a lot of everything.
re: eisenman, the stuff i've seen just doesn't seem that funny and i feel like funny is the point. i might get killed for this, but i thought sean landers was much funnier in his prime. They're both kind of gen X blowhards now...
and Phillip Pearlstein??? That's NOT a snoozer? Come on!
I wish I could be a manatee. Hey Mayberry I like your point about Dzama, it seems most people agree that he needs to get more ambitious or something. The imagery sucks you in but then becomes boring when seen in large groups like in his last show. I just showed some Dzama to my drawing class today. I think they are surprised that this kind of work is actually an option. They are just getting to know contemporary painters, maybe I should tell them about this blog....
ReplyDeleteAs for humor, pretty much everything WW says cracks me up. Are you good in front of crowds? I feel that you could do stand-up or at least be in a sketch comedy group.
You're really workin' it to get a show at Zwirner, eh MM? That's right, grease the wheels...
ReplyDeleteI know what could be more snoozy than Philip Pearlstein. Fred...why?
ReplyDeleteNicole Eisenman's newer paintings are unbelievably good, I can't wait for her show. Have you looked at the more recent stuff, BB, on the Koenig website? I saw a painting of hers recently in a group show or some benefit type of thing - I couldn't believe it was hers at first, it was so different from her 90's stuff.
I have not seen the recent stuff. Maybe it's tons better - she was due for a change around '03. I'll look forward to her show.
ReplyDeletew.w., did I mention that not only are you very funny, but you have the most excellent grammar on this blog, and you're just really a lovely person in general?
ReplyDeleteI was joking about Pearlstein. Really.
ReplyDelete"due for a change around '03." good grief, what a statement. especially if you say oh-three.
ReplyDeletemayberry, who the hell are you? you were a complete prick to me yesterday and now you're all nicey pants.
oh. mayberry's gone i think. do i know you, too, burrito?
ReplyDeleteMountain Man, YOU ARE GREASING THE WHEELS.
ReplyDeleteI am schizophrenic, w.w.
ReplyDeleteI think Eisenman's work has opened up a lot.
ReplyDeleteyou're burrito AND mayberry?! how awful.
ReplyDeleteww, mayberry IS nice. he just got defensive. get to know him. you'll like him.
ReplyDeleteMountain Man, you sound familiar to me.
ReplyDeletei don't trust anyone now. this will be my last comment on painternyc. at least until tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteMM doesn't need to grease any wheels. she's got her own shit going on.
I was? I didn't think WW was in the position to help me get into Zwirner but WW are you? Can you work me into the roster? I'll give you five bucks and be really really nicey pants.
ReplyDeletew.w.: i wasn't a prick! i was stating an opinion. i'm sorry if i came across harshly, i already aplogized for that! i'm actually a sweet person when you get to know me...ask amy. ok, not cool..someone is posting as me. the post that says: "I am schizophrenic, w.w." is a faker.
ReplyDeletesloan, i REALLY dont get what you like. from your posts.
ReplyDeletewhat else do you like?
oh crap. am i in trouble?
ReplyDeleteYeah, don't believe the faker, w.w.
ReplyDeletewow, i'm flattered, people posting as me. i think this is a good sign! w.w.: my name is John and if you read the post about helwing carefully, you'll see who i am. i'd love to know who manatee and mountain man are.
ReplyDeleteI am changing. I am really changing.
ReplyDeleteI like Nicole Eisenman, Karin Davie, Polly Apfelbaum, Judith Linhares...
ReplyDeleteI think Burrito Brother is the true wheel-greaser.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually hey mayberry too.
ReplyDeleteHey Mayberry, if you come to my blog you'll be able to figure it out if you really want to. I posted some of my own work recently. The clues are there. I hope this isn't an invitation for a shitstorm to rain down upon me.
ReplyDeleteI like John White Cerasulo's work.
ReplyDeleteI LOVE Judith Linhares.
ReplyDeletei am a bad person. a very, bad, stupid person. and after you complimented me! i am terrible. i should be dowsed with bile.
ReplyDeletemountain man, i'd love to come to your blog. i think we have friends in common? i'll check it out now. whoa- judging by that parmigianino you posted, i think you and i are a match. christ, you listen to TG as well! i'm listening to "nothing short of a total war" right this second...
ReplyDeleteI like John's work too.
ReplyDeleteeisenman, davie, apfelbaum, linhares, all great. curious why you harshed out on sillman given that group but PLEASE: dont answer, we just got the blog out of a bad place.
ReplyDeleteoh boy, here we go, i think i let the cat out of the bag.
ReplyDeletePS: that last comment was for sloan.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see a re-posting of Steve DiBenedetto's work. So many from the early days of Painter that need to be discussed....
ReplyDeleteooh! i think i figured out who hey mayberry is!
ReplyDeleteI really don't think I was being harsh. It is hard when someone just can't see what the majority is seeing. I won't expound on it, but I don't think she is a strog painter. Her earlier work seemed to know better what it wanted to be.
ReplyDeleteExcuse the type-o.
ReplyDeleteSteve DIbenedetto? WHY?
ReplyDeletePainter--where you been all afternoon, huh?
ReplyDeletesteve dibenedetto is so interesting, i can see why she wants to post it again. his work would provoke much discussion. it's sort of hideous, and sort of amazing, and sort of overdone, and sort of unlike anyone else's and therefore pretty cool. i cant decide if i like or hate and would love to know what others think.
ReplyDeleteI don't think so.
ReplyDeleteI am curious to know what people think of his work. I loved his huge painting in that Whitney show - Remote Visions, was that what it was called? I love his drawings too. His show was good, I thought, but I was underwhelmed after having been overwhelmed by how great that huge one was. I don't understand why there has to always be a helicopter and a squid in every work. I wish there were more images. I am a fan of his work but would like to know what other people think and refine my own opinions more. That's all. There is something really productive in all this hashing out.
ReplyDeleteI like his work too. But sometimes they feel too contained. They are hideous but also really fun to look at, there is so much visual information, really dense. That part I like. I think I like the ugliness of them, but maybe I wish there was more gesture or more movement somehow.
ReplyDeleteHey Mayberry, which cat? Which bag?
ReplyDeleteMM: do you use any IM programs? don't want to give away too much in here. i feel like i have to post in code. i'm "roughpastels" on aim.
ReplyDeleteDzama to DiBenedetto...via Ruth Root and Judith Linhares. Wow.
ReplyDeleteok, someone posted as me twice during my 45 minute commute. It's freakin' me out man!
ReplyDeleteYou don't know me w.w. - as far as I know. But I like your brand of 'tough love.'
And there's only one thing I grease regularly. My bike.
Good group today.
I don't know if Marcel got anything out of it, but oh well...
Wow the trajectory here is kind of scary. I've been lurking on this blog for the whole time without ever making a comment, but here it is. In the last few weeks it has become an insane number of comments, a number of them unproductive insults or arguments, AND now people posting as other people. is this blog falling apart? that would make me sad. On the other hand a lot of new people are coming on regularly and talking honestly. So i hope it keeps on it's track.
ReplyDeleteI am with you illin.
ReplyDeletePlease, no insults, no pretending to be someone else! That is baby stuff. Arguing and even rage is fine but not directed at someone you don't even know. Just make up your own name, don't be someone else, what is the point?
ReplyDeleteagreed mm: i'm eating leftovers... penne + meatballs, you?
ReplyDeletew.w.: i love your work...
ReplyDeletethere are some moments in dibenedetto's work that are truly beautiful passages of paint but the repetition of imagery kind of bugs me because it is too obvious a reference to pot smoking culture. we don't need every painting to have a helicopter, especially if the space in the helicopter painting already references the whirly world of the helicopter propellers or the biomorphic world of the squid.
ReplyDeleteGPD: couldn't have said it better. I need an explanation for the constant re-picturing of the iconic squid and helicopter. The closest I ever read was a Jerry Saltz review from a few years ago where he referred to DiBenedetto's paintings as Vietnam flashbacks. That made total sense. But still, I don't see why he doesn't expand the content.
ReplyDeleteHey Mayberry: leftovers too! tuna, broccoli & rice.
I agree GPD. DiBenedetto really has nice moments, but i have no idea what his paintings are about, except that he likes swirly circular things.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone mentioned Tom Nozkowski yet? Too formal?
I love Nozkowski. Would love to see him here. Not too formal at all in my opinion - I think he's one of the most inventive painters around. I'm glad you brought him up.
ReplyDeleteNoskowski is amazing. He would be one who is hard to verbalize - lyrical abstraction can defy words.
ReplyDeleteLarissa Bates
ReplyDeleteBill Komoski
Gary Stephan
Sharon Horvath
Natasha Sweeten
Richmond Burton
Elizabeth Huey
Whitney Bedford
Giles Lyon
Michael Lazarus
Gina Magid
the comments on this blog are helpful in reminding me that art, if it ever was, is no longer the domain of intellectuals. broccoli and rice! guess my identity!
ReplyDeletesteve benedetto, what's his work about, why the helicopters, the squids. i imagine his work is about steve benedetto. why is there such a frantic desire to pull every element out of the work and into some cohesive object. on one hand people here, like most painters, value work that is unresolved, partly flawed, insecure, but then when the work is too arcane, there are probing questions. people like hey mayberry seem to think that painting should be some race towards contemporaneity. hilo chen should be ashamed of his retrograde tit paintings. why? why does it matter. damien loeb would be much more easily excoriated , if only because he's a pretty boy and his work is empty.
i dont know. it seems like this place attracts people 'in the scene' so it would be my instict to be gentle, because you never know who is reading it. i value work that is personal and honest. in all media and bearing all kinds of appearances. so much bitterness, so many entries. why not make some work and learn to be quiet?
nozkowski was my professor in grad school. he was amazing. talk about tough love. dibenedetto taught there too (rutgers) but i didn't get to take a class with him. he had cult status. he showed a little painting in a faculty show that blew my mind.
ReplyDeleteYeah, he can blow you away, WW. That's what happened to me at the Whitney. And anon. your comment is thoughtful, but why on earth should we be quiet? Painting and silence are not always meant to be together.
ReplyDeletewww.artnet.com
ReplyDeleteLearn to be quiet? No way!
ReplyDeleteI'd love to see an old school abstraction series of posts - abstract painters over 50. That would be cool.
ReplyDeletei always liked sharon horvath. she deserves more visibility. she has a beautiful hand.
ReplyDeletei like dibenedetto because he isn't afraid to make ugly things. the helicopters confused me for a while, but then i just embraced them. they seem very genuine.
Yeah they do seem genuine, Steve's helicopter and squid, but I wish there were more genuine images to see in addition. Sharon Horvath's work is elegant and beautiful. So many painters to post.
ReplyDeletedibenedetto was so popular he had groupies who wore t-shirts with his images on them.
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding? Groupies? That's quite an achievement.
ReplyDeleterick schroeder
ReplyDeletecory haim
josh hartnett
jude law
tom byron
scot baio
rocco siffredi
river phoenix
sam kinison
haley joel osment
PaintersNYC is a real good online source of current painting, which painter should continue to facilitate.
ReplyDeleteSeems I mistook the comments section as a place where its denizens would welcome a range of critical observations regarding art and ideas with open arms and debate them when necessary.
I broke some unwritten rules of the clique, though, huh? Wrote longish posts; pointed out humourless gibberish - sensitive blokes around here.
Since I hurt blogger feelings and offended chatroom sensibilities, only vague presumptuous one-liners from here on in.
Nah, I'll try again, less candidly. Dzama's makes a good jpeg image, looks like a good painting. The ski masks are a cheap way out of the difficulty of painting tiny little faces - the scale of facial details would've helped the work, I think. Period.
ReplyDeleteThomas Nozkowski - Yes. I remember first seeing one of his paintings in maybe 1986/87 at a group show at Jessica Berwind Gallery in Philadelphia.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it nice when you can remember the VERY FIRST time you encountered an artist's work? I mean someone whose name you hadn't heard of at all at that point, but who goes on to become fairly well-known? I got to meet him finally at his 2003 Protetch opening.
Mindy Shapero - mentioned by Hey Mayberry - very much liked her two pieces in Anna Helwing's booth at Art Basel. I wrote something on my blog, but didn't get any pictures.
It was good to see the big Sue Williams piece there (in Miami), which I was surprised to enjoy after hearing so many bad things about her last show. Or maybe it was a case of lowered expectations?
Holly Dzama was just included in a show here in Richmond. She had a couple very small and very very bad paintings, some kind of book which I didn't look at, and a crocheted neckwarmer and mittens - all tacked to the wall. The crocheted stuff wasn't at all Dzama-fied, like his salt shakers and that shit, just regular crochet.
Burrito Brother - I'm glad to read that it was not really you making some of those comments.
Yeah me too, I thought Burrito Brother was an a-hole for a second.
ReplyDeleteMartin, I agree about the Sue Williams - I saw it at Art Basel and thought it was great. But I was also under the impression that her work had taken a turn for the worse.
I am a decent person. I really am.
ReplyDeleteNo one cares, IMO whether you're a decent person. This post is about Marcel Dzama, who is an influential painter from my home city of Winnipeg. His work may veer into illustration but I think the immediacy and imagination of his work is what makes him so popular. That and the fact that he mixes root beer in with his paint.
ReplyDeleteThat's the fake BB above me...
ReplyDeleteI'd love to talk about Nozkowski sometime, and many others on those lists (minus Rick Schroeder)but as far as Marcel goes:
ReplyDeleteI think we have a very 'process' oriented crowd here, and maybe that's why the more illustrational artists like marcel don't fly. As far as Ridley Howard goes, I don't really see it as the same thing - he doesn't touch on surrealism at all. I wonder what people think of Neil Farber also of the RAL. His work is very cute as well, cuter even, but his last show was more about silly process like drawing tiny faces on paint blobs.
yes, root beer. and even better, even more important, he is a kind person who is always smiling and wants everyone to be happy! he is inspiring.
ReplyDeleteI dont' know if you can generalize about the crowd here in that way. If we are talking Winnipeg artists, my personal fave is Jon Pylypchuck or however you spell it. But honestly it is good to remember the root beer when it comes to Dzama and like Martin says, the first time you see an artist is a special thing - I definitely had a crush on Dzama's work, it just didn't turn into that long term relationship. But I hold out hope, the guy is so inventive when it comes to imagery and his oil paintings are very delightful.
ReplyDeleteAnd I do hope we get a chance to discuss Nozkowski.
Dear fellow art geeks, nighty night. Have you all heard the song by Art Brut "Modern Art...makes me...want to rock out..." It's an anthem.
PS - BB, I just meant I don't think you can generalize that this is a "process" crowd. I think it's mixed up and depends on the artist. There is formalist critique, awareness of process but also interest and concern about subject matter. At least to me it seems somewhat balanced. I am sure there are more voices that are needed, but anyway. I am against generalizing. No offense.
ReplyDeleteI'd take Pylypchuk over Farber. Who is whose uncle? Isn't there some intermixing here? Holly seems to be holding up the rear. The Royal Art Lodge show at the drawing center held a lot of promise for playful collaborative spirit. I love the idea of what they were doing. I wish people got together all the time to make drawings - it seems like the most fun artists could possibly have in each other's company, but there was no magnum opus, no culmination of greatness, just little hints here and there. I had hoped for more, personally.
ReplyDeleteI had hoped for more too actually. There was so much positive exciting energy in that show but the results were so mediocre. Made me wish I could watch them make art as a performance - I wish there was a video of their collaborative efforts, it would have emphasized the playfulness and invention. I did love it though, that drawing center show.
ReplyDeleteYes JP is pretty great. His last show didn't wow me as much as usual, but still great. Sorry to generalize. Sometimes it has to be done. And Holly Dz. is also by far the youngest, so cut some slack! I'm off to the studio and then bed. Any more BB insight from now on is fake and should be completely disregarded...
ReplyDeleteI agree with the anonymous of many comments ago. Shut up and paint already!
ReplyDeleteGina Magid? Really. Are we just looking through an art mag and pulling out names here? Is this what it all boils down to? Empty careerist crap?
ReplyDeleteYeah Max, get to work!
ReplyDeleteDon't be so tough anonymous!
ReplyDeleteWhat's wrong with Gina Magid? I hate really anomisity-filled anonymous comments. She's a great painter. I hear tell she has a show coming up. Sorry to everyone, I am under the weather and blogging is my pillow and mattress for the evenings. I promise to go away soon.
ReplyDeleteGina Magid's paintings are loose, free, full of ADD but reinforced with skills. I feel them. I like them. Make a point instead of dissing it.
Wow I really butchered that word - anomosity? Is that how you spell it? I better get hence to bed before any more grievous spelling errors occur. Thanks for the fun forum once again, Painter. I love talking to and against all of you.
ReplyDeleteWhy did you pick Magid over all the other ones listed? What stood out there?
ReplyDeleteAnyone can be tough but they have to back it up. What's up anon? Why you so stinky and assuming everyone's all about the art mags?
ReplyDeleteI would like to reinforce the Komoski, Root, Stephan, Joanne Greenbaum abstraction posts. Let's have team abstraction rip?
ReplyDeleteI made some pasta - turned out really nice, cream, egg, garlic, onion and so on and so forth. One thing - illustration in general is cheaper to produce...just a thought.
ReplyDeleteI like piss, blood, beer and ash in the medium, personally.
Magid is ok.
ReplyDeleteok, one more real burrito post before bed.
ReplyDeleteThe 'don't be so tough' was not me.
Gina Magid's a great artist! She has 2 nice paintings right now in a show at Sandra Gering.
I don't think I've ever seen her work in an art mag...
Good night!
Let's see an abstract avalanche. Let's seem some mature artists who aren't trying to be young.
ReplyDeleteI don't Magid has much in the way of skills. The drawing is so weak.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Magid has much in the way of skills.
ReplyDeletethis is for bart, the posting above me...oh please. what does that even mean? people use art styles/language as a form of espression, hopefully. if someone doesnt draw "well" or have "skills" there is the possibility that there is a reason for this. that it is intentional. you know, like abstract expressionism was/is a LANGUAGE, for example. art is a visual language. the way someone draws or paints or whatever is in service of what they are trying to express/communicate.
ReplyDeletewhat about cy twombly (or any number of post-classical artists from this century). did he have drawing "skills"? or do you think he should have drawn "better"?
I mean precisely that lolla. I mean her drawing does convey anything--it is just there and is not strengthening her intentions. It has very little to do with her project.
ReplyDeleteI saw some paintings on satin where everything was so suck into the fabric in a way that seemed completely unconsidered. If that's the look she was going for...fine, but it seemed from the imagery that she wanted to make a different statement and it was all falling away.
ReplyDelete