2/14/2006

Maureen Gallace

29 comments:

Painter said...

Happy Valentin's Day

JD said...

Happy V. day to you, too, Painter!

Now to negativity: I do not get this painter. Mushy Hopper? Mild-mannered Munch? They feel too indeterminate, too unclear. Is that the point, maybe? The color feels slack-jawed.

Please explain.

olympia said...

Hi! Happy Valentine's day! I really like her paintings. I don't mind that her paintings are repetitive. Sort of like Vija Celmins. Repeating to understand the subject more and more. Sometimes I think that we want too much splash and spark and distraction. We want every artwork by an artist to be different from the others the artist has made. maybe this is an act of defiance.

ck said...

jd- I had a similar response. Upon viewing more of her work (via jpegs), it seems as if they are a very pure and simple vehicle for expression-almost pared down to a symbol? The paintings seem to be moving emotional content without really being much of anything special themselves.

Check out 'Icy Farmhouse' here:
www.jackhanley.com/id56.htm

And this statement:
www.geocities.com/wntltiacnet/artdeal/gall.html

sloth said...

I agree with jd - I have to scratch my head a little that she's at 303. Maybe if I really stretch I can see radicality in her reductive meditation, like Morandi? But then it whips back to looking provincial.

Regi said...

Maureen Gallace @ Artnet

burrito brother said...

She's a very talented painter. When people call paint strokes 'sexy' and 'lush' and what not, I think of her. They are beautiful and old fashioned, yet somewhat modern in their big strokes a la Alex Katz.
I just can't get past the fact that they are 'barn-scapes' though. For me, there's not a lot of relevancy in her imagery (even straight up landscapes might be more interesting, see Ben Butler...) Plus the barn painting is such a little old lady genre that it's hard to get past that.
She handles a brush nicely though.

fairy butler said...

ugh, i can't get on board here. maybe in person there is something there for me?

w.w. said...

they are beautiful in person. little moments. intimate in the true sense of the word.

zipthwung said...

http://wolfkahnpastels.com/kahn/Mother%20Barn%20and%20Child.jpg

How do they hold up to old wolfie?

Anonymous said...

Maureen Gallace's paintings are "cool" without being hip (which is a good thing), empty without lacking emotion, and minimal without being boring.

Fawnpussyass said...

I'd like it if I found it in a thrift shop, I might think, wow, what a cool blurry painting of a barn. But at 303?
ugh. I expect more from the gallery that shows Inka Essenhigh, Collier schore, Mary Heilman...
This work is dullsvill, I love big brushstrokes but a BARN?! It's not even the barn though is it, because I think of Nicola Tysons paintings and think, theres a woman who could do something with a barn...

Anonymous said...

this work rocks - maybe too high concept for some - mega subtle - a much bigger project than just one show or one season's trends. Really just super rigourous paintings - formally and conceptually -

Inka essenhigh is a reason for any painter to leave303 immediately - those paintings are straight up garbage.

Anonymous said...

also - Gallace has been at 303 long before heilman or essenhigh... maybe since soho days...

Jughead said...

I have to say I agree with WW and anon....this work is really subtle, spooky, and seemingly conservative. The paintings are old-fashioned on the surface, but moody and sad, and well-painted. Like Rockwell Kent but depleted of the sublime. The emptiness, it is definitely not lacking in emotion. At first, when I saw these 8 or 9 years ago, I thought I hated them. Totally dismissed them. But then when I looked closer and longer I saw a creepy calm, and agree that the Minimalist aspect of these crypto-thrift store paintings is totally "cool."

biscuit said...

kudos to painter for mixing up the selections - been checking out the blog for a while and appreciate the way it generates debate. haven't seen this work in person but i'm curious now - esp considering that these are all rather small paintings - size DOES matter!

snacky said...

why barns???

martin said...

I've seen these in Tokyo and Boston, I like them but I like Lois Dodd better.

Had an experience last fall visiting 303 (David Thorpe show) when I thought I was looking at some not so good Gallace paintings and they were by another artist named Shannon Oksanen.

Yuko Murata at Basel also made me think a little of Dodd. Some spooky and quiet scenes, but also cute little charm points. Her Tokyo gallery is the same one that shows Gallace.

ck said...

The Lois Dodd's on artnet are fabulous. I'd love to see them.

postmoderndebunker said...

LOIS DODD--Yes! I haven't seen her work in a long time--but a much stronger statement off the bat.

snacky said...

http://www.artcritical.com/fyfe/JFDodd.htm

burrito brother said...

Isn't Lois Dodd like 150 yrs. old?
She's great.
We should all have that commitment and longevity.

marta said...

I think she is in her 60's.

burrito brother said...

Really? I thought 70's or 80's. She's at least as old as Alex Katz...

Anonymous said...

from one anon to another...

"this work rocks - maybe too high concept for some - "

High concept? Are you high? It's a purty barn in a rural setting.

Yes, it's well done and evocative. But if the 'high concept' is within the painting and not just in an artist statement, I am certainly missing it.

Anonymous said...

i mean like the conceptual project of seriality and repettion within each painting and in their totality as well...

among other things,

whatever... - it seems in the end people bring issues of taste to this work fast and furious, which is pretty interesting.... and says more about the peopel responding than the work itself

Anonymous said...

Terrific use of color and contrast creating mood.Hard to do actually.

Anonymous said...

she is young and very beautiful, actually. you need to see the work in person. they're very delicate and haunting. extremely powerful. you shouldn't dismiss them so easily.

Mamula said...

The white surface is too dominant. Parts should evolve from each other. A thought of "white" should be involved it other strokes, grass, sky, trees, ... :-) but than again it all comes with life xp