2/22/2007

Mimi Gross

16 comments:

Painter said...

Mimi Gross @
Ceres
Women, Art and Intellect
547 West 27th Street, Suite 201

zipthwung said...

bad painting right? I mean the color sucks, the rendering is crude, ham handed and blunt.

Makes me yearn for an armani suit and the sleek modern lines of a playboy bunny.

Red Grooms outdoor art fair greeting card whimsy with bad painting macho scumble. Like a day old vendor pretzle pecked at by the pigeons in Washington Sqare park, 1985.

I can dig that. Reminds me of opening my art since 1945 book and wondering if Delmas Howe was cannonized or just sort of a late inclusion in the culture war chapter. What if you wore art on your sleeve like a Jew badge, buttless chaps or an afro pic?

no-where-man said...

no, as a person totaly earnest fussy even.

heidilolatheayatollah said...

I never would have liked this say 5 years ago but now I find it refreshing when compared to the grad school typical formula of art that looks like pick 3 disparate elements that you like, 3 movies you like and appropriate the looks/themes of them to make your own. Puke.

This is totally operating outside of that, it's nice to see such a change from the usual.

Too bad it's at Ceres, isn't that a vanity gallery? I wish for this artists sake it was at Mary Boone or Zach Feur.

zipthwung said...

Fussy bugs me as a rule. Jime Dine, for example has that earnest line stuff but none of the sex. But Id take this painting over the Karin Davie so long as I can keep my beer BBQ and bees. Lots of bees.

I dont think it matters about gallery anymore as long as you have a STAR curator and the space looks stellar? I mean white columns might as well be vanity - arent all galleries vanity? Name one that doesnt use some degree of glamour to color the proceedings.

zipthwung said...

White columns, Ceres, Agora..they are all rentable right? How is that different than renting the piers?
$$$$$$$$$
right?
LKH is showing her power peeps - she curates around an agenda. Shes what you call a power broker. Used to bug me but shes no different than any other politician.
Not my game.

NYTIMESREVIEW said...

Published: February 16, 2007

In a gathering wave of feminist shows this season, “Agents of Change: Women, Art and Intellect” is a modest but timely arrival. Organized by the artist Leslie King-Hammond, dean of graduate studies at Maryland Institute College of Art, with an immaculate installation by Lowery Stokes Sims, former president of the Studio Museum in Harlem, it’s a multiethnic, multigenerational selection of work by 19 artists spanning some 40 years. If there’s a theme, it’s a loose one: feminist art happened in many forms; it is still happening in many forms.

The earliest piece is a 1963 painting by Faith Ringgold, “American People Series: Between Two Friends,” in which two women, one dark-skinned, one light-skinned, face each other across a solid vertical divide. It was way ahead of its time in pointing to a major rift, along racial lines, in organized feminist politics to come.

Ana Mendieta’s 1974 photographic series, “Untitled (Body Print),” mixes sexuality, violence and mortality in a moving and disturbing performance: these pictures could be about Iraq today. Nancy Grossman’s “Sketch for Double Tethered Figure” from the same year paved the way for her extraordinary leather-bound sculptural heads, which blew conventional images of femininity to smithereens and helped open the door for younger artists like Laura Aguilar, Nicole Eisenman, Catherine Opie and Kara Walker.

Many artists with roots in the 1970s are now doing their most ambitious work. One is Joyce Kozloff, who has been producing a multipart, installation-scale world history of war and colonialism. And, as always, artists are in communion with other artists: Miriam Schapiro channels Mary Cassatt; Lesley Dill draws on Emily Dickinson; Mimi Gross, in a life-size group portrait, gathers a roomful of female artists associated with the influential cultural critic Arlene Raven, who died last year and to whom the show is dedicated.

Judging by appearances, most, if not all, of the women in the portrait are white. The old racial rift has not been bridged, and this reality demands concentrated attention and debate, starting now. The Ceres show, an initiative of the Feminist Art Project centered at Rutgers University, coincides with the annual meeting of the College Art Association in Manhattan this weekend. The conference has scheduled a series of panels on feminism, which will, presumably, address ethnicity, “queerness” and divide-to-conquer art marketing.

Of course, art conceived from a feminist perspective has always tried to trip up the machinery of the academic art industry and raise a collective voice, in myriad ways only beginning to be defined. You’ll find some evidence of this in the Ceres show; some more in “Re:Generation,” a survey of emerging female artists at Smack Mellon in Dumbo, Brooklyn (through March 11), and still more in “What F Word?” at Cynthia Broan Gallery in Chelsea (through March 17).

Other shows are on the way, and be sure to check out the online journal M/E/A/N/I/N/G. Its new issue, “Feminist Art: A Reassessment” (writing.upenn.edu/pepc/meaning/04), asks many questions about the past, present and future that will surely shape discussion in this feminist year. HOLLAND COTTER

zipthwung said...

Apex Art.

...There must have been any number of artists that might have been included, but I wanted the show to be made of people who were part of my life.....

...I am not a curator, but I felt that such a show would itself be understood not as an ordinary art exhibition, but as what Wittgenstein calls an act of piety, and serve as an aspect of the question of what art is after all for, and how it, just as Hegel had said, serves, together with religion and philosophy, as a moment in what he called Absolute Spirit.

Arthur C. Danto, 2005.

closeuup said...

OK I read Thru the Flower when I was 20. Judy always bugged me then because her take on history was not critical of the whole idea of it. She just wanted to be included. Whining for power? I found it embarassing. The Dinner Party is embarrassing. Yes I saw it in person.

I like her Diary Drawings though. You know I like that personal/inner feelings shit. And the prismacolor.

This painting is funky. It's OK. It reminds me that I am visualizing voting for Hilary Clinton. More history. Will I vote for my girl, even though I don't agree with her warmongering policy? We'll see.

I think that everything that's ever happened is history, so obviously I'm out of the loop.

artgirl said...

Don't think I can get behind this one. I wish I knew who those folks are/were though.

zipthwung said...

If you are not part of the system no one will have heard of you.

Criticism of the system is a sales pitch.

Apparently there were 383 fragging incidents logged in 1970 by the US millitary.

Just part of my pedagogy

closeuup said...

Speaking of fragging. At the end of a love affair, one of my female friends slit all 4 tires on her exs car, and set fire to his silk kimono on the front lawn.

I like rage.

zipthwung said...

the judge has a demo tape

Cooky Blaha said...

Zip, you gonna step to Matthieu Mercier at the armory? Heard he was cribbing some of your shit..

zipthwung said...

Maybe. I dont think I'd care unless someone made a career out of lava lamps or something. Not that I have the corner on lava lamps, just saying.

Any plans on releasing vermin? Up Against The Wall Motherfuckers!

We are left with the sobering question that The Love-Ins poses: was this movie made by filmmakers who'd taken too much LSD, or was it the work of those who hadn't taken nearly enough?

no-where-man said...

Armory is just one pier and REAKS of money - a far cry from the DIY of 7 years ago. Wall to Wall comfort.