6/01/2006

Carroll Dunham



27 comments:

triple diesel said...

(l)Solar Eruption, 2000-2001
Mixed media on linen, 84" x 100" x 1"

(r)Edge of His World (One), 2002-3
Mixed media on linen, 81" x 84"

no-where-man said...

arg, tres heavy-handed. they make me angry. maybe thats the point.

Brangalina said...

Nice follow up to Keith Mayerson.

albino radio1 said...

w/ carroll dunham i am always as interested in what surrounds center stage. the subtle but worked sky, and the flatness of the wooden night. the surroundings often feel bleak.

Cross said...

These paintings might make me nostalgic for the 1980s, but only if I had liked the behind the scenes popish things being done then. I think these are supposed to look fresh, but only look fresh-frozen to me.

They do make me want to go look at the power of Philip Guston's paintings again, though. No "ish" of any kind in his late work.

EZ PEE said...

I'm going to put on my Members Only jacket. Remember?
Fishsticks!

no-where-man said...

"dickhead" omg thats so BAD it KILS ME...
i got ill at the NewMuse.

PS said...

Dunham's pictures and ideas seem to be getting sort of flimsy.

I like his earlier stuff much more. Give me a nice, pulpy Dunham and I'll totally enjoy it. He was working things out and blowing his mind a bit and it shows. Today Dunham is looking more like product. The Dickheads are getting formalist and dried out, being pushed back towards abstraction. Okay. Attractive, crispy compositions, but... A kind of interesting spin on really well-charted territory. Make it new, Carroll.

bluebalz said...

definitely now a product, especially those manufactured sculptures from a few seasons back at b. gladstone, souless exercises in consumption. i also like the old dunham, the ones with the stuff pasted on, the balls, the gunk. they felt fresh and adventurous, the late dunham dont get it. also why here now, what about some of the shows up in chelsea now, hollingsworth, or stephen mueller

JD said...

I've always found these boring, to be honest. They don't go beyond a snarky, "naughty boy" kind of cartooning, for me, as opposed to Guston (the obvious comparison), in which the cartoony language expands out, somehow. It's full of feeling. Kind of like Chris Ware, or Art Spiegelman. I also don't think that Dunham takes many formal chances; I'm never surprised enough by these paintings.

flesheater99 said...

Guston goes Nickelodeon.
same as it ever was.

they'd look pretty fresh hangin on my fridge though.

Cooky Blaha said...

one of the most overrated contemporary artists. Almost as horrible as Jim Dine.

Professor Mouth said...

Hey TripleDeisel, just wanted to applaud the choice of representing each artist with multiple examples. This site just got a little bit smarter. Perhaps partially due to that new choice, the last few painters you've posted seem wildly more interesting than the previous batch of artists. I'm actually anticipating, not fearing, who you'll post next.

Professor Mouth said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Professor Mouth said...

And I'm not a huge fan of Dunham(less and less over time)... but Jim Dine? Ouch.

Palooka said...

I agree w/ most of you here. It's gotten borig, rote. He should maybe go all the way abstract, via the second painting shown here, like penis-man-modrian. Would at least be something new.

Brangalina said...

Hey Professor Mouth why such an ass? If you are going to be so insulting to the host all the time don't come on.
Of course you like this work it all has an illustrative base you write/illustrate comic books, right? It doesn't make it smarter it makes it your interest.

devinlevin said...

"Tip D." in the place to be. keep goin' tip!

Professor Mouth said...

Hm. Why such an ass? Brangalina, I suspect that's somewhat of a loaded question. Alexis Rockman, Zak Smith, Yi Chen... these are all 'illustrational' painters, and I loathe them all. So you haven't quite pegged me. And what exactly is Illustrational about Spencer Sweeney's work? Not everyone's tastes are limited to what resembles their own work. Nice try, though. And what's 'smarter' is the simple fact that an artist's practice, the intentionality and consistent concerns of their work, are communicated much better through multiple examples. And the reading of the work is no longer dependent on the cosmetic properties of a single canvas. How is it not preferable to present MORE data on an artist before subjecting them to the kind of shallow, drive-by bon mots this site traffics in? Sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities. You can get off the cross now.

Martin said...

i like dunham's work, don't find it boring at all - the old stuff and the new stuff, paintings drawings and prints - and am surprised to hear that so many of you do.

guston is most often referenced when discussing dunham, but he always makes me think of twombly, especially that room at the philadelphia museum of art -

http://anaba.blogspot.com/2005/09/philadelphia-museum-of-art.html

brian edmonds said...

I have a friend that worked with Dunham on some of his prints. He really likes Dunham but I do not care for his work. I like Guston better.

no-where-man said...

is posting more then one pic. "intrinsically better" i don't know that is pretty dogmatic,

what would anyone do with a dick that thin?

JpegCritic said...

i like zipthwung's work, don't find it boring at all.
Even though he said 'fuckyou' to me once...
When you're on Aphasia or Lamé, you just gotta
go with the flow. And I like PM's work. Its like a hit
of coffee... Two 20-ouncers of it after a binge of
Aphasia and Lamé. And after two Veinte's, you just
gotta say fuck-you to somebody, or else risk going
mad.

traderguy said...

Peter Saul is another name that springs to mind with Dunham. I think both artists produce really interesting work. Dunham is also a superb draftsmen - his drawings are as good as you can find anywhere. These penis faced guys are quite political - I heard them likened to Chenyesque characters - quite appropriate to the times anyway.

ad3pt said...

Carroll Dunham likes to play. Im not particulary fond of the content - kind of loopy, corny, cynical. He's really not to into the concept of 'high art' is seems, or maybe hes fucking with ppl as fars as 'hey, look how much these fools will pay for these completely dorky and horrible images'. It definitly reminds me of a comic strip though. the last show that I went to of his at Gladstone I did like how he started leaving evidence of his process - he left a lot of the surface unpainted, delineated brushtrokes, the paint was kind of mixed haphazardly. I appreciate that to some degree. The Whitney Show last year was more insightful into his process as well - the drawings were totally awkward. Doesn't seem like he takes it that seriously; maybe thats the lesson here?

EZ PEE said...

these are the kind of marsh mallow, drive-thru bon bons this ice cream truck doesn't like.

A monotonal bore. These paintings say peg leg butt plug. At least the old work had some suppositorial elements.

Im a fighter not a lover, jpg critic, and bloated pustulent bedsore.

I use one liners
and the bon mot -
Fuck -
Why not?

JpegCritic said...

Yeah ez, yer my father and all that and i saw the latest star wars for the first time today while waiting at compooosa for my cinema display ... It took an hour for them to find it in inventory even though web found it in inventory an hour ago, meanwhile I marvelled at how fake the star wars franchise has become, visually. All fighting, light sabers and all, but no reflections. The world is made of reflections on surfaces.