i didn't love the show, but i liked some of the mark making. the palette seemed predictable. i really liked some of the compositions, though - she has a really great way of manipulating the square format.
maybe the color was a bit too "of the moment", combining pastelly with bright, (a la laura owens) but she does have a nice touch, she's young and i think will develop a lot further, in a good way.
i like the sense of humor and enjoyment of the craft - believe that obscuring the subject matter is the point, kind of playing with perception. a little game of hide and seek. refreshing in it's way - too much work that tries to be self-important ends up sinking under it's own weight.
anon- i'd say they look spontaneous rather than impatient, and as far as "implying possibilities" goes - doesn't that seem to be the point? the title of this piece is "CROPPED FOREST WITH YELLOW LEAVES AND MAYBE A CAT, 2006" - to me it's more about suggestion and working in the margins of representation and abstraction rather than a literal depiction of the subject. what can i say - i like 'em
I saw these today, and I'm ambivalent about them; I think a 2nd look is in order. They're inventive and energetic and confident, but also maybe something a bit unsatisfying about the way they're painted; they stray so far down the "fresh" path that they start to get sloppy and fall apart. But maybe that's okay? Dunno. Also, the "hinted-at" subject matter was pretty cutesy; I didn't always feel rewarded by all the deciphering. This seems like a young painter with a lot of potential... I'm curious to see what develops.
i totally disagree w/ the anonymous(es) who say suck and crappily. i thought they were freshly painted and rather pleasing. i had a few things to say but not about the painting "quality". my only complaint was that they just seem like school of laura owens, and/or ellen berkenblit and other people-- whimsy, pop, animals, hidden/uncovered, image/abstraction, etc. all somewhat familiar gambits. but jeez, she's a young painter and made a nice bunch of work.
20 comments:
i loved the show, some of the color felt a bit flat, and the subject matter a bit obscured, but maybe that was the point.
i didn't love the show, but i liked some of the mark making. the palette seemed predictable. i really liked some of the compositions, though - she has a really great way of manipulating the square format.
maybe the color was a bit too "of the moment", combining pastelly with bright, (a la laura owens) but she does have a nice touch, she's young and i think will develop a lot further, in a good way.
i like the sense of humor and enjoyment of the craft - believe that obscuring the subject matter is the point, kind of playing with perception. a little game of hide and seek. refreshing in it's way - too much work that tries to be self-important ends up sinking under it's own weight.
This looks interesting... I'll check them out on saturday.
Impatient paintings...too impatient, not enough attention spent on any aspect - they imply possibilities but kind of don't go anywhere.
this may be the best piece in the show but it seems a lot is missing from these works. something absent in comparison to her earlier works
Foxy Production
617 West 27th Street
Ground Floor
New York NY 10001
212.239.2758 (t)
Hi Switch Back
sad to hear that someone thought dave mikos work was slight, last night
anon- i'd say they look spontaneous rather than impatient, and as far as "implying possibilities" goes - doesn't that seem to be the point? the title of this piece is "CROPPED FOREST WITH YELLOW LEAVES AND MAYBE A CAT, 2006" - to me it's more about suggestion and working in the margins of representation and abstraction rather than a literal depiction of the subject. what can i say - i like 'em
w.w. someone anonymous said it in the heffernan comments
miko is unassailable in my eyes
Look forward to seeing her show, I like the way Frogger describes them. They look playful. I like the "maybe" aspect.
mm, tell me what you think after you see them in person. i am curious. i missed the heffernan show last night!
I saw these today, and I'm ambivalent about them; I think a 2nd look is in order. They're inventive and energetic and confident, but also maybe something a bit unsatisfying about the way they're painted; they stray so far down the "fresh" path that they start to get sloppy and fall apart. But maybe that's okay? Dunno. Also, the "hinted-at" subject matter was pretty cutesy; I didn't always feel rewarded by all the deciphering. This seems like a young painter with a lot of potential... I'm curious to see what develops.
http://www.coolopticalillusions.com/optical_illusions_images_2/images/facedragon.jpg
Wheres waldo?
I totally agree, Sloth. Well put.
Yeah they are pretty crappily painted.
i totally disagree w/ the anonymous(es) who say suck and crappily. i thought they were freshly painted and rather pleasing. i had a few things to say but not about the painting "quality". my only complaint was that they just seem like school of laura owens, and/or ellen berkenblit and other people-- whimsy, pop, animals, hidden/uncovered, image/abstraction, etc. all somewhat familiar gambits. but jeez, she's a young painter and made a nice bunch of work.
Familiar gambits = b o r i n g
very ..yellow and sloshy.we dont need this.
Post a Comment