Rauschenberg = best Artist ever. This image really does not give a sense of "Songs for Sale" - the show traces a terribly interesting story of cinematic painting. The scale of the 3 works are emencse combined they fill the 3 main walls of the Wooster space. one really needs to locate themselves with in the show to understand the physicality of these paintings. i HIGHLY recommend making the trip. can't find any images on the net right now to illustrate this point. - will post some images when i get back to the city thrus.
Rauschenberg isnt abstract but is it visual muzak? I dont think so. Im a synaesthete and all I get is white noise.
On the other hand, I do get bounced back and forth between the subject and object, me, interpenetrating the medium, it, giving me the message. All in all its a party in my mouth. Like pop rocks.
Do you like Jazz? Why? I think its more fun to play jazz than watch it vicariously.
Most people make abstract painting like its a recipe from the Moosewood cookbook.
In this day and age Nascar has more to do with life- is more socially relevant than abstract painting.
Take Sal Scarpitta - he told one of his drivers that being an artist was more dangerous than being a dirt track race car driver.
True or not, thats what you have to say, how you have to be, if you are going to sell paintings for millions.
My friend calls him a sleeping giant. Contemporary art would look totally different without him. Strangely he often leaves me cold or depresses me the way supermarket aisles full of brightly colored products do. Detritus. It doesn't make me like him less,which is also strange.
I think ole Rauschenberg ages very, very well. There is such a range to his body of work that I still manage to be surprised and discover things of his that I have never seen before... like this.
It's a shame that there are so many Rauschenbergy knock-offs nowadays.
I was sad when I couldn't go to his major retrospective in NYC last year, but I think it will be in Paris this Xmas at the Pompidou. yay!
Mr Peeps it is strange that you feel comfortable slinging gutter insults at me after my rejection of your "feminist" description of a "grotesquely large" woman. I wear a size 4 and just don't share your issues. Everyone is indebted to Rauchenberg. Notably Johns and Rauchenberg went against earlier, purist trends in abstraction. Nothing has been the same since including abstraction.
"Yet despite its formal achievement, the esthetic cool of Ray's piece is disturbed by the fact that this is a cast of a vehicle that supposedly caused a real-life death. It is impossible not to wonder whether a corner of the car's hood that juts into the space above the driver's seat somehow proved fatal. Along with the ghostly color and dull patina, a few traces of the car's owner -- an embossed "Jesus is Lord" plaque on the trunk and a small hand-lotion bottle next to the gear shift -- give the sculpture a kind of ghoulish aura. Unlike Chamberlain and Rubins, who maintain an esthetic distance from their crushed-metal medium, Ray relinquishes detachment. The car's cold anonymity makes it seem a truly morbid work -- a formally enticing death mask that asks us to appreciate it as art.
COPYRIGHT 1998 Brant Publications, Inc. COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group
Normally I like queer readings of art history but I try to avoid it with Johns and Rauchenberg despite their obvious humor and camp. The Charlie Finch review of Johns was pretty homophobic and used it to disparage him. I'm excited to see this Michael Bevilacqua painting. He's a nice person and an ambitious artist.
i think it is ok for an Artist to grow with his/her wealth - anything else would be a lie. from the sounds of things Warhol never would have been Warhol with out these boys rejecting him for being 2 and commercial). bob and johns favored a tougue in cheekness butch over uber swish. even in sub-cultures there are disparages. CF and that whole crues "homophobia" smoke screen can blow me and blow me hard. crap i am more then double a size 4. guess its all over.
No-Where I was thumbing my nose. You are very pretty in painterpaparazzi. Not scamming on you, it's sincere. Painter has a picture of me being obnoxious I hope will stay buried. The hatred within subcultures bothers me too. People who are not gender normative are made into poster children on one hand and disparaged on the other.The Wendy White show reminded me of Rauschenberg and Larry Rivers but more ghetto fabulous (compliment). Did anybody else think so?
Peeps there were three arguments going on when you first insulted me: -a feminist critique of art as an expression of the dominant narrative (you) -a formalist view that painting and it's beauty transcend narrative and oppression( the guys) -a queer reading of the way art has historically provided a counternarrative which runs through and often against the dominant narrative ( me ) Maybe you picked a fight with me instead of the guys because we share some common ground but have vastly different views of gender ( dualistic vs. orthogonal as in Sedgewick) and art history. I agree with Larry Pittman that female and gay artists could potentially be the next avante garde although I also think a variety of people could claim originality. I think Larry Pittman knows more about art than Marilyn French. It's so hard not to read Rauschenberg this way. What he did was radical. I'm reluctant because this argument has put him and Johns in a marginal niche when they altered the whole heirarchy. BTW a person who would know has told me they were never actually lovers, just friends who had a bitter falling out. And can somebody tell Finch nobody says buggery anymore?
Peeps you mispelled refrigerator a few posts back. We are all typing and disussing casually. I'm reluctant to have this discussion about Rauschenberg but it is so damn tempting. I'm interested in the ways art is disruptive and challenging. I'm not willing to fortify a heirarchy which excludes me. But this view of his work has put him at the margins instead of the center challenging things where he actually was.
OK peeps let's have a truce. Academic readings of art history and a narrow school of feminist criticism I avoid share one thing: sucking the sex out of art history and replacing it with gender. The exact thing Finch did in his review of Johns. Focusing on who pop artists slept with instead of how sexy pop art was.
Boys with higher PCB exposures are less likely to engage in masculine patterns of play, and girls with higher exposure are more likely to engage in masculine play. They also find an association with dioxin: more feminized behaviors were found in both boys and girls exposed prenatally to higher levels of dioxin.
can i fantasize about both hands, or does that make me a coward?
finch's fantasies about hot female wife-beater wearin painters in nyc heat -- hot memories of cool swimming pools -- now that's what i call good art writing!
Kalm James I don't want to make an essentialist argument that only some artists are inherently radical. Queer in theoretical terms refers not just to orientation, but to disruption, variation from normalcy, playful forms of masquerade like drag...
I'm wondering what Painter's [curatorial] intent was to place Rauchenberg after Dona Nelson (granted i haven't read much posts above, so it may be answered...)
Is the intent to accentuate a failure on the part Nelson's skill to pull-off painting-as-sculpture? (her verso seems like a cheap add-on like a two-for-one bargain sales-pitch... or like those '90's keyboards and mice with transparent plastic -- glorifying 'process' as instant-value rather than appreciating process as an aesthetic proposition. ) Not that i care much for raushenberg. Yall should feel sorry for me.
I love his combine paintings. I think they're some of the most original and aspiring works of the 20th century. His printmaking has been to prolific though. He lost his way back in the late 70's.
I find it tedious polarization jpeg too--I've also read somewhere that the Lascaux caves panting are copies after the original, well the french have made that third replica-- The originals, and those people they served, had, supposedly, a multidimensional lucky strike. The particular civilization had advanced operating organs, so it went, that worked better than ours to enter this fabric and virtual 'sail'. What the person would receive standing in front of the drawings is an actual movie 'of a kill', sound (P. Glass I'm not sure), and who knows what, not that i remember. I don't know where I read that. Or did i make it up? And if it is not true< well, does it matter. Does it not set some wheel in motion--deeper structures, greater thought, less grab bags, the agent of human, culture, enterprise--success. I understand sneers and smears at 'a male history and its goods' are necessary--but should we not look a little more carefully, give better than the supermarket analogy, talk about why this another person wasn't given the same treatment. I think it's more productive in the long run. Or is that way too old fashioned and elegant? Is there no time available left?
But if someone's got shit to deliver, well, why not! It comes back anyway!
37 comments:
Robert Rauschenberg @
Deitch Projects
September 06 — October 14, 2006
18 Wooster Street, New York
Songs for Sale, an exhibition of three large-scale paintings by Robert Rauschenberg, David Salle, and Michael Bevilacqua
Rauschenberg = best Artist ever. This image really does not give a sense of "Songs for Sale" - the show traces a terribly interesting story of cinematic painting. The scale of the 3 works are emencse combined they fill the 3 main walls of the Wooster space. one really needs to locate themselves with in the show to understand the physicality of these paintings. i HIGHLY recommend making the trip. can't find any images on the net right now to illustrate this point. - will post some images when i get back to the city thrus.
if these works were songs, I list them as classics! They hold up over the decades!
Rauschenberg isnt abstract but is it visual muzak? I dont think so. Im a synaesthete and all I get is white noise.
On the other hand, I do get bounced back and forth between the subject and object, me, interpenetrating the medium, it, giving me the message. All in all its a party in my mouth.
Like pop rocks.
Do you like Jazz? Why? I think its more fun to play jazz than watch it vicariously.
Most people make abstract painting like its a recipe from the Moosewood cookbook.
In this day and age Nascar has more to do with life- is more socially relevant than abstract painting.
Take Sal Scarpitta - he told one of his drivers that being an artist was more dangerous than being a dirt track race car driver.
True or not, thats what you have to say, how you have to be, if you are going to sell paintings for millions.
Jean Miotte
is an action painter. Will THEY ever give up? I hope so.
(hint: WHitney program-don't show there unless they turn on the air for you.)
"You taught me language, and my profit on't
Is, I know how to curse. The red plague rid you
For learning me your language!"
Or something like that.
My friend calls him a sleeping giant. Contemporary art would look totally different without him. Strangely he often leaves me cold or depresses me the way supermarket aisles full of brightly colored products do. Detritus. It doesn't make me like him less,which is also strange.
detritus
Erratum: I meant groceries.
Juice Boxes
The pop guys went against the AbExers in almost everything except one thing--size.
"cogito ergo sum"
I have to see this person.
I meant to write, "i have to see this in person."
I think ole Rauschenberg ages very, very well. There is such a range to his body of work that I still manage to be surprised and discover things of his that I have never seen before... like this.
It's a shame that there are so many Rauschenbergy knock-offs nowadays.
I was sad when I couldn't go to his major retrospective in NYC last year, but I think it will be in Paris this Xmas at the Pompidou. yay!
Mr Peeps it is strange that you feel comfortable slinging gutter insults at me after my rejection of your "feminist" description of a "grotesquely large" woman. I wear a size 4 and just don't share your issues.
Everyone is indebted to Rauchenberg. Notably Johns and Rauchenberg went against earlier, purist trends in abstraction. Nothing has been the same since including abstraction.
"Yet despite its formal achievement, the esthetic cool of Ray's piece is disturbed by the fact that this is a cast of a vehicle that supposedly caused a real-life death. It is impossible not to wonder whether a corner of the car's hood that juts into the space above the driver's seat somehow proved fatal. Along with the ghostly color and dull patina, a few traces of the car's owner -- an embossed "Jesus is Lord" plaque on the trunk and a small hand-lotion bottle next to the gear shift -- give the sculpture a kind of ghoulish aura. Unlike Chamberlain and Rubins, who maintain an esthetic distance from their crushed-metal medium, Ray relinquishes detachment. The car's cold anonymity makes it seem a truly morbid work -- a formally enticing death mask that asks us to appreciate it as art.
COPYRIGHT 1998 Brant Publications, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group
here
Normally I like queer readings of art history but I try to avoid it with Johns and Rauchenberg despite their obvious humor and camp. The Charlie Finch review of Johns was pretty homophobic and used it to disparage him.
I'm excited to see this Michael Bevilacqua painting. He's a nice person and an ambitious artist.
R.I.P.
Im an outsider though, so I dont get it.
If I reference someone does that mean Im influenced? Or is it more of a nod? Im afraid of being contaminated, is all.
i think it is ok for an Artist to grow with his/her wealth - anything else would be a lie. from the sounds of things Warhol never would have been Warhol with out these boys rejecting him for being 2 and commercial). bob and johns favored a tougue in cheekness butch over uber swish. even in sub-cultures there are disparages.
CF and that whole crues "homophobia" smoke screen can blow me and blow me hard. crap i am more then double a size 4. guess its all over.
No-Where I was thumbing my nose. You are very pretty in painterpaparazzi. Not scamming on you, it's sincere. Painter has a picture of me being obnoxious I hope will stay buried. The hatred within subcultures bothers me too. People who are not gender normative are made into poster children on one hand and disparaged on the other.The Wendy White show reminded me of Rauschenberg and Larry Rivers but more ghetto fabulous (compliment). Did anybody else think so?
kelli--who IS gender normative? I have no idea.
Peeps there were three arguments going on when you first insulted me:
-a feminist critique of art as an expression of the dominant narrative (you)
-a formalist view that painting and it's beauty transcend narrative and oppression( the guys)
-a queer reading of the way art has historically provided a counternarrative which runs through and often against the dominant narrative ( me )
Maybe you picked a fight with me instead of the guys because we share some common ground but have vastly different views of gender ( dualistic vs. orthogonal as in Sedgewick) and art history.
I agree with Larry Pittman that female and gay artists could potentially be the next avante garde although I also think a variety of people could claim originality. I think Larry Pittman knows more about art than Marilyn French.
It's so hard not to read Rauschenberg this way. What he did was radical. I'm reluctant because this argument has put him and Johns in a marginal niche when they altered the whole heirarchy.
BTW a person who would know has told me they were never actually lovers, just friends who had a bitter falling out.
And can somebody tell Finch nobody says buggery anymore?
Closeup we are in comparison to people like Gwen Arujo and Brandon Teena who face issues we can only imagine.
Peeps you mispelled refrigerator a few posts back. We are all typing and disussing casually.
I'm reluctant to have this discussion about Rauschenberg but it is so damn tempting.
I'm interested in the ways art is disruptive and challenging. I'm not willing to fortify a heirarchy which excludes me. But this view of his work has put him at the margins instead of the center challenging things where he actually was.
OK peeps let's have a truce. Academic readings of art history and a narrow school of feminist criticism I avoid share one thing: sucking the sex out of art history and replacing it with gender.
The exact thing Finch did in his review of Johns. Focusing on who pop artists slept with instead of how sexy pop art was.
Boys with higher PCB exposures are less likely to engage in masculine patterns of play, and girls with higher exposure are more likely to engage in masculine play. They also find an association with dioxin: more feminized behaviors were found in both boys and girls exposed prenatally to higher levels of dioxin.
here
Suburbia=dioxin.
NationalFrontDisco said...
wade honey that cover oozes chronicle and taschen.
I'm ordering mine.
can i fantasize about both hands,
or does that make me a coward?
finch's fantasies about hot female
wife-beater wearin painters in nyc heat --
hot memories of cool swimming pools --
now that's what i call good art writing!
Kalm James I don't want to make an essentialist argument that only some artists are inherently radical. Queer in theoretical terms refers not just to orientation, but to disruption, variation from normalcy, playful forms of masquerade like drag...
the word 'versus' --
now a popular substitute for the word
'against' but etymologically connected
to the idea and term -- 'bend'.
When will we get over this
tendancy to polarize?
Abstract != representation ad nauseum.
I'm wondering what Painter's [curatorial] intent
was to place Rauchenberg after Dona Nelson
(granted i haven't read much posts above,
so it may be answered...)
Is the intent to accentuate a failure on the part Nelson's
skill to pull-off painting-as-sculpture? (her
verso seems like a cheap add-on like a
two-for-one bargain sales-pitch... or like
those '90's keyboards and mice with transparent
plastic -- glorifying 'process' as instant-value rather
than appreciating process as an aesthetic proposition. )
Not that i care much for raushenberg.
Yall should feel sorry for me.
I love his combine paintings. I think they're some of the most original and aspiring works of the 20th century. His printmaking has been to prolific though. He lost his way back in the late 70's.
I find it tedious polarization jpeg too--I've also read somewhere that the Lascaux caves panting are copies after the original, well the french have made that third replica-- The originals, and those people they served, had, supposedly, a multidimensional lucky strike. The particular civilization had advanced operating organs, so it went, that worked better than ours to enter this fabric and virtual 'sail'. What the person would receive standing in front of the drawings is an actual movie 'of a kill', sound (P. Glass I'm not sure), and who knows what, not that i remember. I don't know where I read that. Or did i make it up?
And if it is not true< well, does it matter. Does it not set some wheel in motion--deeper structures, greater thought, less grab bags, the agent of human, culture, enterprise--success.
I understand sneers and smears at 'a male history and its goods' are necessary--but should we not look a little more carefully, give better than the supermarket analogy, talk about why this another person wasn't given the same treatment. I think it's more productive in the long run. Or is that way too old fashioned and elegant? Is there no time available left?
But if someone's got shit to deliver, well, why not! It comes back anyway!
songs for sale--
o kelli--as a strait woman i've NEVER had to imagine a man killing me because of my sexuality!
I would LOVE to paint with both hands......
Post a Comment