Wendy White @Sixtyseven gallery547 West 27th Street, #309New York, NY 10001
so good it hurts
quite an eye painter. did u pick this 1 cuz of its similar composition with the KMcH?
Already said I liked this show but will say again. Like the Chie Fueki show ( which baffled me) better to see in person.
love to love ya I was starting to feel metrosexual. All better.
are the 80s graf artists who got booted out of the system being mined?I dont mean this in a negative way but this painting reminds me of this futura 2000 paintingalso of 80s guys still selling like kenny scharfand I guess i gotta say David Reed just cause of the brush strokeI suppose the last two are kinda dumb to mention? but futura gets slept on (with reason;his art got real boring)the dangerous part for me is the constructivism similaritiesespecially cause there are some russian constructivist painters who also used an airbrush, but I'm not gonna try and find images for those though. Personally I just have a phobia of retrogression. Is there a clinical name for that?
Its called having fun I think...WW is compared to isa genzken. Like I mentioned - anxiety of influence shouldnt keep you from making history.History repeats itself. I dont believe in progress beyond the personal.
This painting doesnt hold my iterest. Its like a bonbon
phobia of retrogression:eightieshatingflasheoncanvasflashbackscandycolored coprophobiabillcosbysatonmyairbrushgraffhairballs
I see the Genzken comparison with her sculptures but not the paintingsGenzken cant be called retrogressive though, her stuff looks incredibly fresh to me.I dont mean my points in a negative way, I enjoy some of Wendy's work, just being inquisitive about the connections.I heard someone rapping on the radio about rocking a Cosby sweater throwback
to me, this is interchangable art that i would never be able to identify by name due to the vast number or 'graffiti' works out there who are interchangable in look; ..many of whose names i unfortunately cannot recall.... by the way does anyone know anything about 'new american paintings"? is it actually looked at by dealers/gallerists? or just by artists...
Cooky I will cut back on geek humor and historical trivia. Somebody told me the old subway system was amazing and beautiful before the city started removing all graffiti from the cars. He said it was like riding in works of art.
@epi, you said the same thing about Mchague; obviously somebody likes his stuff if he's selling at Metro for 5 figures. Kelli I like the historical trivia..I personally think NYC subway art from the 70s + 80s was some of the most original American folk art ever, but it did get extremely watered down once it reached canvas.
Cooky,yes, art is subjective; and some people , in my opinion, have no sense of what is worth "5 figures" (i.e., like my teddybear)... and perhaps are soley looking at it as an investment in an individual artist whose work, will probably tank in about five years;... and if not, good for them!...but bad for the artist who may lose out when it falls in a secondary market....
anyone know what the 'new american paintings' is about...?who uses it?
does anyone know who looks at or actually uses 'new american paintings'?
I didnt hear of it till now, just browsed through it, saw a James Esber that I kinda liked.magazine (is that what it is?)seemed kinda boring though
it's a strange catalogue/business. i don't know who actually purchases it or how it is distributed... sort of a catalogue where people enter artwork in a competion (with entry fee)... if you get in , you pay some small fee (again i believe) and then it is given to 'someone' and to bookstores for sale; and then 'someone else' sees your brilliant art and approaches you for a show,job, purchase or gallery... OR it is for artists to simply awe at themselves and 'be documented' and for the company who started it to be monetarily pleased (i guess) ...anyone know anything about it???i've seen it floating around over the past few years...
I saw this show today and thought it was great. A must see.
Sure I look at it. It's in my pile, aboveleaves of grass next to the john.Don't know much more about it than that. But if I were the editor, I'd take out the mug shots and move the bio to the left of spine(beginning of artist section). My one big annoyance is my reading eye gets assaultedfirst by the inconsequential statements andmugshots upon opening the book(s).What a waste of valuable real estate.
I have not seen the show as of yet. I am pretty sure I saw this artist's work at the Sharpe Open Studios a few years ago. Really loved the sculpture.
Anybody been to a Megachurch? They sound subversive.TransumerismMassclusivitydid you hear it here first?Im on it.
jpeg,agreed, the mugs shots are dreadful and cheesy...really makes the catalogue look hokey ... any more info on it anyone? anyone got a gallery from it? or a dealer? or anything solicitous or fun?... it feels like a business that rakes in some$ from artists trying to be seen, don't know...
I saw it on the newstand I think - a friend asked me about it so I looked at it. Looks middle brow - like Mixed Greens or much art here - nothing wrong with it?Slithey Toves.
it is mediocre, but not a far cry from some of the postings on the blog...
This show is excelent and MUST be seen in person. I don't see the conection to grafiti art besides the use of spray paint but that to me is a superficial association and not as relevant to the work as say AbEx. I'm not saying graffiti is bad but WW's strikes me as distinctly of the New York AbEx tradition, plus ironic yet beautiful and hallucinatory day glo.What you can't see in this Jpeg is the meatiness of the paint and the nimble play with texture. No artist I've ever seen uses black like WW can. WW I think your show kicks ass.
i will reserve judgement till i see the show..what did ya'll think of the Graffiti show at Brooklyn Museum? My roomie and his buddies just bombed my hall and i have to admit - i like the energy and sense of 'place' in it.Charles Saatchi rents out his artCharges range from £7,000 a year for five works to £20,000 for twenty works
The show is wonderful. The space in the paintings is my favorite part; very physical and twisting. The graffitti references are playful, knowing resamplings; the paintings themselves aren't eighties retreads. They are actually in a surprisingly fresh dialogue with AbEx.
Sorry Thunderpal, you just said what I said, only better.
I like her statement"In these works, they examine the central role images play in bolstering and validating systems of belief and power, and they interrogate the continual recycling and re-inventing of political, social, and artistic traditions, which are consequently revealed to be depleted of any authentic meaning. "
about new american paintings - i always look at it when i see it on the shelves (including seeing it in bookstores in tokyo), have seen a number of good artists in it over the years, and have known a number of artists who have been accepted. jered sprecher is in the current issue... i saw his stuff at wendy cooper in miami last year and very much liked it.of my friends that have been included... nothing at all happened for most, but a couple were contacted by (non-nyc) galleries and picked up.the first time i saw laylah ali's work was on the cover of new american paintings. when i visited boston not long after i went to miller-block specifically to see her work, which they pulled out of storage for me.i've applied a number of times, but never got in.about wendy white - i am excited to see this show! maybe thursday!
eppi, bottom line is that new american painters isone of many distribution channels that seem topropose well-meaning alternatives to our currentelitist gallery economy, in that its aim is toprovide a humble artist with exposure to a publicbroader than the one's we are currently indebtedto, and thus more of a potential to make a buck,or a living. That in itself has got to be a goodthing. Sure it won't get you an invitation to playwith Red Krayola. But as cheezy as it can potentiallyget, it also has the potential to out-do the currentmiddle-man-old-school-gallerist distribution model.. .once the snobbery dissapates from the system...Knocking out the middle-man has serious potential,as illustrated in the housing market where onlinebrokerage services present a serious challange tothe old brick-and-mortars. But back to the publication,all it needs to do, is to cut the cheeze.
Regarding “New American Painting,” my wife was featured in one of the first issues many moons ago. After the first blush of having the work reproduced there wasn’t much bounce. If you want to know how seriously the “art world” takes a publication like “New American Painters” just look for references of foot notes in well known publications like Art In America, ARTFORUM or Art News, or look for some mention in other scholarly works. My take is that this is being published somewhere north of here, is affiliated with some studio programs maybe in Vermont and kind of specializes in locally recognized, conventionally professional painters. No one, and I’ve probably scanned ten issues, that I’ve seen (other than my wife) seems to have broken through to a larger stage, but there’s always hope. I have to admire folks like the publishers who try to challenge the big city “powers that be” and whenever you get something published it can’t hurt. Other less scrupulous magazines will run anything for a price, including giving you a cover and a feature article. People outside the Greater Metro Area haven’t got a clue so some cough up the cash.Graff in the subways in the 1970 and 80”s was just as cool as 2300 homicides a year. Don’t get me wrong I like the idea of graff, knew some of the writers, but its vandalism, a crime. If it’s not a crime, if you don’t risk going to jail or some nasty fines it’s not real graff. Harring, Basquiat, Futura 2000 and Scharf weren’t real writers. Herring’s black poster drawings were as close as he got, they were able to capitalize on the buzz but generaly stayed away from the trains. I couldn’t call this painting Graffiti, just some spray paint, as a way of expanding the painter’s vernacular. The palette’s kind of grading.
jpeg and all, thanks for the info,i understand the potential sincerity of immediately selling one's work if one can, but that could hurt the reputation of the artist if they are not careful and have long-term aspirations to me, it seems kind of like saying you have a show at a restaurant on your bio..also feels like it's kind of like an interior decorator's catalogue because the work is not seen in the flesh and is ready to buy...and an artist's ability to sell their work with out a show or record of sales would probably be 'cheap'...dunno, whatever works for each artist's vision...i just like understanding art world dynamics... artist beware...
haven't read any comments yet but this is dubz right?curious to see where this goes or if she feels she needs to go beyond this somehow..the 80's stuff doesn't bother me, perfectly fine. Don't feel that an artist in early stages of career needs to bang down evident surface concept, on the sleeve if you will...so nice paint exploration, would like to see in person.
laylah ali. many more. james siena.
eppi, i think you're concerned (as are we all)about the filter of criticality. The filter wecurrently trust is built into the current system.The world moves fast these days. I believethe model of criticality will one day change.There is a battle right now, over truth/authority, between wikipedia and brick-and-mortar groups.I'm not takin sides right now, but it's enoughto observe that certain challanges are being madethat will effect how we digest or experience the world.
liked the painting. disliked the sculpture which looked slapdash and glib.
Liked both. The sculptures reminded me of Nicole Cherubini for some reason. The humor and playful, clumsy use of materials.
I like Wendy White. I like this image too. I'd like to show it here, in Tokyo, sometime. Glad kellie likes, and closeuup.
the show was hard to see in the small gallery. pretty big paintings in small room. everything looked cramped and sortof generic (maybe isa gezken sculptures, maybe 2000 katherine benhardt McD landscape) kinda unfortunate to see this show after seeing keegan at metro where space did not limit the work. context is powerful.
katherine benhardt is sloppy and stingy. WW's paintings are a battelground. The paint shifts from liquid mist to solids, they possess the qualities of violence and grace.In my favorite WW paintings the edge seems to crush the forms together and in a humorous way buttress or hold up the architecture of the bulky forms.
Sometimes I think context is everything. The combination of the show being at a powerful gallery and by a new young artist is probably enough to guarantee that Roberta Smith will write about it for the Times.
I mean this about the McHargue show.
regarding the graffiti reference: it is inaccurate in my opinion. i dont think white is concerned with channeling Basquiat or tagging bridges, nor is she concerned with what would ammount to other limp art historical references. this is not to say she is not conscious of her predecessors, clearly she is. the intelligence of this work lies in the delight of making it not in making an art-history-insiders joke - a motivation refreshingly awakened by painters like her, sillman, and greenbaum. white not only made good, fun paitnings, but expressed an confidence in her mark making such to encourage delight in what would otherwise be a cumbersome and boring technical device (spraypaint). the immediacy of the technique seems to be what she needs to accompany the surefootedness and decisive strokes in the rest of the work. the only clumsy move made was the inclusion of sculpture to an aotherwise great painting show. this is not to say the sculptures were awful, but they lack the resolve and mastery exhibited in the paintings. the inevitable and annoying comparisson and dialogue between the two mediums thankfully only slightly subverted what is a terrific, must see show. Well done.
WW's leaves Keegan's work in the dust. We are in need of a reality check when we see artists like Keegan showing in premier galleries like Metro while more deserving and talented artists are forced to find smaller outlets. It should be obvious to everyone that comparing WW to Benhardt is way off. Critics should be able to distinguish and champion talent over hype. I'm waiting for a critic to rise and voice the sham of the current artworld and hopefully give acclaim to WW.
palette is ...grating-(not "grading"?)
thunder - these do not seem like a battleground - dekooning's early work is battleground, labored to find some meaning. these are closer to a squabble, seemingly made very quickly (like bernhardt's) and thus a closer connection to grafitti than abex. fast can be fab! but it is tough terrain
Thanks exu, your right, long night.
“Critics should be able to distinguish and champion talent over hype. I'm waiting for a critic to rise and voice the sham of the current art world” karl’s blog, stop whining, and get out there and stick it to the man. If you’ve got the ideas don’t wait for some knight in shining armor to save the day, through your hat in the ring and take the crap that comes with voicing an opinion in public. Otherwise keep the covers over your head.
WW's paintings look fast, yes. That is an illusion. Those big fat brush strokes loaded with multicolored rainbows of paint are planned out, she is plotting the brushstroke before she makes it, stratigizing, each brush stroke is a two part process, that isn't spontaneous.It's a battle alright, with strategic manoeuvring. I really hate the Bernhardt referance you are going back to bacause she is SUCH a lame painter.
W.W does seem to be churning them out-and not in a possessed way-I find them a bit hasty,and becoming predictable-at least the black/brite ones
Katherine Bernhardt is good just not as good as Dawn Mellor who is much older. People might want to take age into consideration for her or McHargue.SixtySeven was the first place to show Echo Eggebrecht. They seem to have a good eye.
thunder - the pre-plotting and strategizing seems irrelevant. i didn't think the show was great. but my initial question was about the small gallery space and the density with the 3-d work included in a small space. maybe a zwirner or even bellwether would have done wonders for the show. better lighting too. i see loads of potential in white's work. i think she should take more time to allow the paintings to evolve (even with pre-strategizing). allow for the strategy to get disrupted. get dirty, messy (i love some of bernhardt's messy areas, browns; and bernhardt makes LOADS of TERRIBLE paintings but she sometimes totally hits it). white's paintings seems like she already knows what she wants to make and they become expected abexlike. i recall a prof saying that if you already know what you want to make you're apt to make mediocrity. the truly exceptional are those who do not now know it is they are going to make.
B17 "nor is she concerned with what would ammount to other limp art historical references."yeah. Look at her actual statement. TO her, these are psychogeographical landscape paintings, and I believe her.shes painting from life through the lense of Arrrrt. Not having some "fresh" conversation with history, stroke for stroke. Maybe they are fresh - but I think they are traditional (meaning of a closed loop in art history - thats not death anymore than humanity is dead-but it does repeat itself, and if you look at her formula, you must agree with me).THis is not her best painting - go to her site. I like some of them - they show some effort.Katherine Bernhardt is a usefull comparison - the McDonalds Arch she did is by far my favorite painting by her - and also her angriest and easiest.THe self portrait stuff (most ) is sort of stupid. I wish she'd try to paint more subjects.Terminal narcissism.Criticality is the real issue here. I think you can see when a painter is working criticly - and it matters, not because it deconstructs the meduium, but because it informs the painting.THere are a lot of paintings in publications that fail the criticality test (I mentioned the dude at the Chelsea art museum - hes the worst kind of faux - but maybe he works for people, not I) Most people are happy, comfortable and have nothing to say, and their audience is happy, comfortable and has disposable income. They gamble it away. They buy tchochkies. They pat themselves on the back in magazines they own. They flip paintings for millions of dollars. Yep, most people are pretty darn lucky to be alive. Knwo what I mean?
How can you tell the difference between strategy and spontenaity? I'll guess she's using both
I had a friend who painted like this - just as good, but where are they now? Not NY.
"How can you tell the difference between strategy and spontenaity? I'll guess she's using both "closeup, could you please expand on that? Im young and callow and I dont understand the simplistic formalist criticism of WWW's work.
only if you elaborate on this simplistic notion: Most people are happy, comfortable and have nothing to say, and their audience is happy, comfortable and has disposable income. I dont think you understand most people.Does this relate? "What I am trying to establish is--that Modern Art isn't dislocated, but something with roots, tradition, and continuity. For myself the past is the source (for all art is vitally contemporary). I'm drawn to the primitive, the ritual and fetish elements, to the symmetrical and plastic order (peculiarly basic to both primitive and classic concepts, so relating the two)."
zipthwung said... I like her statement "In these works, they examine the central role images play in bolstering and validating systems of belief and power, and they interrogate the continual recycling and re-inventing of political, social, and artistic traditions, which are consequently revealed to be depleted of any authentic meaning. " not her statement. its komar and melamid.not to dispute your valid opinion, but i've always taken my reads from the work and not the statements which i find to be tedious and ringing too loudly of effort. example: "psychogeographical landscape paintings" - i dont even know what this means, but i'm pretty sure it has something to do with making up words. i'm not trying to be an asshole herem just saying an artists voice is more apparent in the "Arrrrt." not to quote myself, but i believe i also said she is aware of her predecessors; i maintain this as acknowledgement of your 'functioning in a loop' idea, but refute it as a painter myself, and because the statement essential reduces to the end of originality. this is clearly not the case with this, and most notable work.
pola dots manI think a lot of people would claim polke as an influence.Nice twombly. this could end donuts as I know themIm PISSED!
B17 - well I try to keep it interesting (terminal narcissim) - i was paraphrasing wendy:here"I reinvent these mental pictures through an intuitive network of marks and gestures. "Reinvent being a mental process (psycho) and geography being self explanetory - mental landscapes based on the "real"THeres this Kant and Hegel subject object bullshit but in essence I thik we can say everyone is INTUITIVE and leave that out of our artist statements as bullshit.
This painting reminds me of Repo Man. Twombly feels more chalky. This is like Twombly seen in a haze of neon, and yes, dancing the Sigmar Polke.
WW's work is great: smart and idiosynchratic and kinda twisted. They look like they were fun to make. She gets acrylic to look like oil paint, which is a trick I'd love to be able to pull off. I like the way she messes with the right angles of the paintings with those sneaky wedges in the corners.There's something new and interesting going on with gestural abstraction right now - bubbling out of Richter and Oehlin and coming from a contemporary context of painting rather than an AbEx lineage: Eric Sall, John Bauer, Wendy White.& whatevs about artists' statements... they're a necessary evil; critics need hand-holding and something to crib.
word up mothra.zip, thanks for breaking down that big word for me. i read wendy's statement and i think that, while that might make for good handholding (thx mothra) i don't see anything in the work that would lead me through to the particualr social responsibility the statement implies. this is not to discredit wendy's statement, im sure its true. it's just not my read. anyway. . .
Everyone could say they work intuitively, in an artist's statement. Statements should be taken with a grain of schmaltz.WW walks the fine line between beautiful-ugly and ugly-ugly. It's fearless, and not afraid to be gestural or redundant.I kinda like some of the sculptures, from what I could see on the gallery site. They remind me of the work from the early nineties by the woman who added styrofoam balls to her paintings (?). I didn't like that work. But, somehow WW furthers the gloopy grace that they seemed to be after.I wonder how this kind of work will look in a few years.
walk the dog
take it to the streets
Mothra states:“There's something new and interesting going on with gestural abstraction right now - bubbling out of Richter and Oehlin and coming from a contemporary context of painting rather than an AbEx lineage: Eric Sall, John Bauer, Wendy White.”This seems an interesting notion. Some followup:1. Ab Ex as drawn from a modernist lineage, both embraced historical precedent while demarcating a very clear, individuated notion of American painting as found in the NY school. They set the new ‘gestural bar’ that all European painting now had to contend with; as well as subsequent American painting. Without this break, we would read painters like Richter and Oehlin differently.2. All ‘gestural’, contemporary painting has to play two games now: one, ironic awareness that this type of painting is ‘out of our time’, of another era. Two, simulation has become such a modus operandi that for us to feel any tinge of conviction, everything has to be a few steps removed.Fabian Marcaccio’s first paintings in the early 90’s made an obvious reversal of the notion of gestural. 10-15 years’ out, the game only continues with subtler degrees and strategies by which to deliver the concept of gestural, not to the service of gesture alone, or grand narratives associated directly with Ab Ex, but for this moment in time and its various preoccupations. With WW, I’m trying to figure out what the gestural component is in service of outside of a stylistic statement.
I'm skeptical whenever anyone says any kind of painting "has to" do anything.
Lichtenstein turned the brushstroke into a thing (in art talk a "reified" thing) about 30 years before Marcaccio. We've had close to 50 years of it. Really seems like an academic idea to me now.
good tomas,it seems riskier to not draw a line from the past to some contemorary current conceptual thread, That seems like painting for intellectuals. I'd personally rather see work that doesn't attempt that and doen't need an excuse to exist. Wendy, if you are out there, How do you feel about some of the painters mentioned, like polke for example? Do you plan to work with pattern, imagery, or are you keeping it completely gestural? have you drawn your own personal line you don't want to cross?For me , i would like to this approach (WW's) with more varying degrees of depth. Would make it more interesting to me. I tend to gloss over the surface right now admiring some of the color, thiness, that stuff. I'm not captivated by this though. There is alot you can do with this gestural approach and i'd say keep experimenting and challenging yourself with this stuff.
It is an academic idea, or rather a didactic idea, but I don't think that's what's going on here. Lasker quotes brushstrokes and it's boring; Nozkowski doesn't. Marcaccio does, WW doesn't.
ps i meant good tomas - be skeptical of people that think painting should be one way.but what the heck is wrong with academicism? Where does painting come from? I've yet to see anyone pull this shit out of their ass!
Arcana but I'm reminded of a series of little known Robert Indiana sculptures a friend was storing. Roughly painted, metal and wood, bits of text. Not slick like the Love sculpture. If I can find an image will post it.
They were a little like these but a different series. I think they were older.http://www.artnet.de/Galleries/Exhibitions.asp?gid=587&cid=79672
I think WW's work can be located within the American ABEX framework giving much debt to Rauschenberg. WW is working within her own boundaries and I believe she has found a great wealth of substance to play around with. Look at her website www.wendywhite.net. the whole aesthetic really comes together in convincing gestural compositions. Its true there is a battle going on here but it is in her committment to discover what hasn't been tested yet and the well worn path of immatators. Also, even though spray paint is trendy as hell, WW uses it like a building material, covering up and filling in. Again, I will say that when Roberta Smith gives a great review to a a weak undergrad, there needs to be a reality check.
I like what I see of ohlen but there are a lot of people who paint like that (polke).Hard to define yourself as an ab-ex style individual when you paint like that.merry christmas
They seem heroic to me. They seem celestial. I love them.
Mothra,point taken.the reason that I bring up FM is that he was so directly concerned with the gestural, pulling it completely apart, bringing it into a completely different medium, ect.... in short thrashing it to see what was left over thus creating a series of works that were pretty sharp at the time.You brought up the notion of gestural working in a contemporary context, and I'm verying interested in how it works, how far you have to push it outside of itself for it to still work.
gestural doesnt always equal ab ex. its just gesture sometimes, when artists "quote" minimalism, like all of those now dated looking tape painters of a few years back (and yes i am including mehretu, a sacrilege to say in some circles), it is given a lot of intellectual credence, does that mean that using gestures in painting only means one thing? it can mean a lot of things, and not always emotional.
Totally agree popeye. A great conversation about this was in a book that Hickey published where he interviewed David Reed. There should be much more room in the gestural lexicon beyond Dekooning and Pollock. I think today it might be more intellectual just since there are so many more artists to think about than then. Still, I think WW's work is emotionally "felt" whereas Mehrutu seems designed and distanced from emotional expression.
no doubt popeye.
popeye:"does that mean that using gestures in painting only means one thing?"Exactly... my take is that to use the ploy of gestural it needs to mean exactly more than one thing. That it either needs to be complicated, or it needs to service a larger concept.JM paintings use many painting languages from hard edge to gestural, and she employs gestural for multipurpose and her paintings are better for it even as they seem to become repetitive for the viewer. (I was pretty blown away by her two prints at the MOMA drawing show a couple months back. First time I had seem her small scale prints- stunning.WW paintings seem constrained by their making, and seem bereft of a referent outside themselves, and thus less interesting than they could be.
there is a new book out, called High times Hard Times, New York Painting 1967-1975, a catalogue of a show curated by David Reed and Kay Siegel, it addresses these issues and also talks about how a segment of abstract painters who address these issues that are being talked about NOW , were kind of written out of the dialogue that only included minimalism and abstract expressionism. all young painters should read this book, to see 1. they did not invent distance and irony in abstraction 2. the female and feminism influenced a lot of males who then went on an became rich and famous etc. The show is coming to NYC sometime in 2007
@poppy: you consistently make the point that your tastes gravitate in favor of painters who favor expression from the gut rather than an intellectual approach. I respect this opinion and think it can be a valid one. However I'm wondering who you would name that would embody this practice? Just curious to find out.
Some great points have been made. Although I like this WW picture, it feels like it is in that beginning stage where the anxious mind is turning off and the quiet knowing mind has been turned on. The question for me would be, is this enough? Or, Can I continue with the same mental space between the right and left? Or will I get messy and make mistakes ? Can I recover?
i actually favor the intellectual approach, but the point i am making is that someone that uses gesture can be intellectual and that the two are not mutually exclusive, its a cliche to think that something gestural and loose, is emotional and from the gut. thats just not true and a stereotype of a type of painting. also intellectual painting isnt necessarily hard edged. look at albert oehlen, its loose and gestural, but is considered smart. (and by a man so automatically has credence that a "gestural" women will not get. theres a lot of really dumb paintings out there that use smart devices, computer, technically hard processes, and some of that is the dumbest and emptiest stuff around. also by the way, the painting featured here of wendy white looks like a suzanne mcclellend to my eye.
Popeye:thanks for the tip on the catalog for High times Hard Times, New York Painting 1967-1975... did not realize D. Reed was involved as curator. Great.
Popeye: I saw a bit of this show at David Reed's studio about a month ago. A precursor t the upcomuing traveling show with the catalogue and I can tell you that there was so much work that wresteled with today's concepts when talking about non-rep imagery. I am also looking forward to seeing some credit go to these artists. Clement: that mental space is the the same intuitive and intellectual space that I feel WW has been mining for a while.
I'm with clement on the not quite done part. Something like a nervous teenager stuck on 3rd base and trying to get home on a bunt.
Wendy White, her rhetoric, is not really about 'trying to have her cake and eat it too!' but more a strategic way for taking a contemporary urban angle back to zero.Anyway, embedded is a whole new way of seeing, in the sense that somewhere along the way someone lost sight of where they were going, but didn't mind anyway.
wade & clement, have you actually seen the show, or are you going from this one jpeg? The work sometimes plays at the edge of "doneness," but it's a deliberate choice. Sometimes "finishing" a painting can mean finishing it off, closing it down. Her restraint is gutsy and refreshing.Click here and here and here for some of my lousy pictures of the show.
To any of you in the Greater New York area. I’d like to recommend “The Number Paintings” Alfred Jensen at Pace Wildenstein, opening Sept. 28, 6-8 pm 545 West 22nd Street.Jensen (who died in 1984) has to be one of the greatest of the American abstract painters. His reputation has cooled a bit in the last fifteen years, but for some of you younger artists this could be an introduction to some of the most challenging and thought provoking abstract works of the late 20th century. A total original!
Mothra,I admit I have not seen the show and from your photos, I would think otherwise about those pieces. They look much richer. thanks
just the facts: i have the High Times Hard Times book and it is a show curated by KATY Siegel (not "kay") and the curatorial ADVISOR to Katy was David Reed.
well, maybe he isnt technically the curator, but he advised her on the artists and had a huge hand in the show. also, "kay" was just a typo, relax mr peeps....
still have not been to show (out of town) honestly this work looks "bored" to me
no-where man, your opinions come out of nowhere.
Bored by Alfred Jensen. Always have been. Looking forward to the K. Siegal and Reed curated show and looking forward to going back to WW's show before it comes down.
nice pics thanks mothra
He's a real nowhere Man,Sitting in his Nowhere Land,Making all his nowhere plansfor nobody.He's as blind as he can be,Just sees what he wants to see...
How many of you know this artist personally?
I dont know anyone here personally--that I know of
I want to know you thomas. wheres the work?
thomas, the work?
The tone has become a little too personal.
I don't particularly favour gestural painting over more intellectual approaches, but i do think it becomes harder for critics and curators to sell. If they don't know how to wrap a contemporary conceptual frame around it they are tounge tied. I really don't like painters that need a catalouge of text book to support themselves. Personally this is getting a bit bored to me. The thing i dispise the most is trendy work. And, to sit around and think of ways to create work that is clever as it relates to art history, is trying to hard to please. here is an example: I recently saw a show where the artist scribbled gestures on sheets of metal. Then used had edged lines of paint to represent architecture and space and this also represents how she feels in urban centers etc blah blah.... Now you can talk about this until the cows come home but really this artist needs to shut the hell up. I just say stop making excues to paint, do you really give a shit how big cities make you feel? Do these paintings alleviate some of the pain?damn fucking nerds...
ok so who represents the the other side of the spectrum that you like? just curious
yes that is the song is the reference. love personal attacks. i don't know the Artist or have any reason to like/dislike the jpeg. i do get pretty into graff. and Ab Ex., maybe i just "don't get it" as i mentioned earlier i am not very smart.
right now i really like anything or anyone that i can steal from to make me a better painter. I'm selfish. I don't like paintings that are very obvious or quick and clever.. I too tried stuff like this and it gets boring. some of those germans are good.but no 1 step 2 step right now..
Hot painting ;)
Kelli said:the male artist... said "you wouldn't be pretty if I knocked your teeth out" after I disagreed with him about collage of all things.
the male artist... said "you wouldn't be pretty if I knocked your teeth out" after I disagreed with him about collage of all things.A verbal threat of violence is a felony in New York.you could press charges the next time this happens if you have a witness.
People should be careful how they say things, using threats to intimidate is cowardly.
P dog it's cool. Maybe openings should stop serving beer :)
maybe some people should start going to aa meetings.
they all know the artist. yawn.
actually thats a gross exageration YAWN, but if you're so clever, lets see the family free, and then tell me why friends can't post about each other and support each other. Ok? Tell us all why it's not ok.
yawn feels left out :(
Post a Comment