'The lost truth of Gumby rolled up to ()original form', that's the title I'd give.
Personally I like the more formless, oddly forming, pieces not in this show, but I guess this was designed for a set audience, hopefully not a set time.
RR's stuff got progressively better year on year, though haven't see too much the last few. The aluminum bits had some real strange shelf and cupboard space--a very different subreal.
I like work made from humble objects and stuff. Arte povera and so on. If art is about ideas, why should you have to spend money on materials?
Even if you do spend money on materials, why should it be expensive, in the international style?
Thats the sort of thing THEY want you to believe - materials rank right up there with fear in my book of fucked up commodities.
Its interesting what constitutes value, or valuable. I never thought of diamonds as being that interesting, and yet, and yet.
If you, a diamond and a hunk of gruyere were hanging out and suddenly a bear threatened, and you could only grab one, I'd kill the bear and eat the cheese. Start the a forest fire with the diamond and then hide. THat sort of thing.
Choices.
So if you look at this work not in the negative sense (see several above posts) and more of a choice kind of way (see "blood diamonds" and "total bullshit") then its a fairly rational way to spend your time (as the artist) and your money (as the collector). Especially if the show sells. Which I expect it should.
Beats a dale Chihuly dontcha think?
What would you rather have on your walls, a blown glass dustrap or a humorous comment on the insanity of living in a world created by an angry god?
A humorless unleavened Leipzig painting or a light hearted angelfood jab from the california dream?
Oddball screamers--wouldn't put Shapero is the sculptural camp: More scamp who ranges and roams. This image pegs the repetitive, peeps. Though other work works very marksmanship intuitive.
wouldnt put Shapero in the sculptural camp??? Then how do you deal with all that three dimensional matter lying about the gallery that you trip over when you attempt to look at the painting?
I think you are misconstruing the "negativity" from the medium. the shortness of entry. I agree if you mean all the I hate the system stuff, but if we sanitize, or censor, then we should all log off. It is incorrect to equate criticism with negativity. Perhaps cynicism is easy, but I would say easier is to just nod in approval at it all which just supports the status quo. Criticism is very difficult because people do equate it with negativity. Perhaps structure the conversation so that one has to note what one enjoys about the work rather than what is wrong. You can try that but there will be alot more silence. There is a long tradition in the western world of understanding something by understanding what it is not. And what it is not can be excellent as well. The eastern traditon certainly embraces acceptance, which is admirable, but then everything just is. That is the "is" of artistic definition that is the current sway. This stance is definitive of postmodern thought and opens the field, but then to quote Wittgenstein no rules no game. As far as comparing artist to artist this is also a postmodern standard, family resemblance theory. Perhaps someone could comment on what this is and the pros cons of using it as a basis for critique, and how that would apply to painting in general.
... definitively in the sculptural camp. The boulders are in the eggy brancusi short-shrift round that's for sure--there's, by the way, something painted on them! They are in the road, right bats!! Maybe the painting thingys are in the road too? Anyhoo...
It's not trying to be anything except what it is. It feels genuine and raw, emerging. I liked the use of the word lumbering in a previous comment, yes.
some work invokes strong opinions, even hate, to tone it down for group acceptance=not such a good idea.So keep on keepin on painter dog. I got something out of both painter dogs opinion and cathy's, even though they are on opposite sides of this. That is the beauty of it all.
Mindy, Saw your work at the current show at Hirshorn. Congratulations! Glad to see one of my classmates at MICA makes it big -- Gives the rest of us hope~ Would love to go to NYC to see your current Solo show before it's over. Ming
i think this is really crap and unimaginative. It's stuff like this that makes me not want to go out to shows - it doesn't do anything for me. But I'm an amateur so heck what do I know? Haven't you got any more Lucian Freud posts? or another really good painter is Tai-Shan Schierenberg - he's much better than this crap that's for sure.
34 comments:
Mindy Shapero @
CRG
535 W 22nd Street
NYC
didnt know what to do with this show, please help.
The Happy version of Delia R. Gonzalez and Gavin R. Russom?
at Daniel Reich.
Formal, obdurate, weighted, lumbering (in a good way) searching in a good way and yet there was no one work that held sway. Anyone?
First reaction to the use of the centralized face made with holes in the support:
Michael Tetherow
Face, Oil on canvas; 1975; Unframed; Canvas size 48" x 36 1/4"
http://animationandfineart.com/Fine/Images/Tetherow/Tetherow2628.jpg
Michael Lazarus
awful but appropriate for a halloween costume
matt johnson
and here
I still like the gentrification interpretation though - thats my vote.
wrong thread.
halloween's over.
that's got to be the one worst painting posted on this blog to date.
This is in a gallery?
God help us...
Maybe the 3-D pieces are better, then again maybe not?... but the titles are really too cute (and too long) and the project revealed as disingenuous.
Maybe the 3-D pieces are better, then again maybe not?... but the titles are really too cute (and too long) and the project revealed as disingenuous.
your to kind.
This is the worst trash, hmmm, come to think of it Justin Lieberman's work is worse, well maybe yes maye no...
maybe at that level it doesn't matter anymore...
this show dont look that bad from the jpegs... like if franz west and jim drain had a precocious child
'The lost truth of Gumby rolled up to ()original form', that's the title I'd give.
Personally I like the more formless, oddly forming, pieces not in this show, but I guess this was designed for a set audience, hopefully not a set time.
She's someone to watch!
i remember liking two drawing/paintings i saw last year...
this painting is howling... sharing the pain.
i am thinking of ruth root and her cigarette paintings.
the only root I know of look like monique prieto mixed with greg bogin please link to cigarette stuff
thnx xoxoxox
they were abstractions, hard-edge abstractions, with a little smoking cigarette poking out of a seam... sometimes also eyes. like an after-cigarette.
i can't find any images, except for this one with three cigarettes, chilling out -
http://www.contemporaryartproject.com/cap/images/big_art_root.jpg
that isn't the best example... it's more effective when there is just one cigarette in the painting.
RR's stuff got progressively better year on year, though haven't see too much the last few. The aluminum bits had some real strange shelf and cupboard space--a very different subreal.
i felt like this all day... and commin downs the hardest part.
I like work made from humble objects and stuff. Arte povera and so on. If art is about ideas, why should you have to spend money on materials?
Even if you do spend money on materials, why should it be expensive, in the international style?
Thats the sort of thing THEY want you to believe - materials rank right up there with fear in my book of fucked up commodities.
Its interesting what constitutes value, or valuable. I never thought of diamonds as being that interesting, and yet, and yet.
If you, a diamond and a hunk of gruyere were hanging out and suddenly a bear threatened, and you could only grab one, I'd kill the bear and eat the cheese. Start the a forest fire with the diamond and then hide. THat sort of thing.
Choices.
So if you look at this work not in the negative sense (see several above posts) and more of a choice kind of way (see "blood diamonds" and "total bullshit") then its a fairly rational way to spend your time (as the artist) and your money (as the collector). Especially if the show sells. Which I expect it should.
Beats a dale Chihuly dontcha think?
What would you rather have on your walls, a blown glass dustrap or a humorous comment on the insanity of living in a world created by an angry god?
A humorless unleavened Leipzig painting or a light hearted angelfood jab from the california dream?
Me neither.
But its as good as Banks Violette right? Why not?
Is this what happened to the screamer in Munch's painting just seconds after I turned my eyes away ?
Oddball screamers--wouldn't put Shapero is the sculptural camp: More scamp who ranges and roams.
This image pegs the repetitive, peeps. Though other work works very marksmanship intuitive.
wouldnt put Shapero in the sculptural camp???
Then how do you deal with all that three dimensional matter lying about the gallery that you trip over when you attempt to look at the painting?
tocutornottocut:
I think you are misconstruing the "negativity" from the medium. the shortness of entry. I agree if you mean all the I hate the system stuff, but if we sanitize, or censor, then we should all log off. It is incorrect to equate criticism with negativity. Perhaps cynicism is easy, but I would say easier is to just nod in approval at it all which just supports the status quo. Criticism is very difficult because people do equate it with negativity. Perhaps structure the conversation so that one has to note what one enjoys about the work rather than what is wrong. You can try that but there will be alot more silence. There is a long tradition in the western world of understanding something by understanding what it is not. And what it is not can be excellent as well. The eastern traditon certainly embraces acceptance, which is admirable, but then everything just is. That is the "is" of artistic definition that is the current sway. This stance is definitive of postmodern thought and opens the field, but then to quote Wittgenstein no rules no game. As far as comparing artist to artist this is also a postmodern standard, family resemblance theory. Perhaps someone could comment on what this is and the pros cons of using it as a basis for critique, and how that would apply to painting in general.
This is a blog to deal with issues right?
Theres one at least.
... definitively in the sculptural camp. The boulders are in the eggy brancusi short-shrift round that's for sure--there's, by the way, something painted on them! They are in the road, right bats!! Maybe the painting thingys are in the road too?
Anyhoo...
I dont like it period.
That's my opinion, if you don't agree that's fine with me that's the point of this medium.
It just does nothing for me and I don't see why I have be critisized for thinking that.
Its negitive because I have that responce from it.
It's not trying to be anything except what it is. It feels genuine and raw, emerging. I liked the use of the word lumbering in a previous comment, yes.
I enjoy this alot and I get something from it.
That symbol of the three circles signifies pure evil to me. And danger as a symbol.
some work invokes strong opinions, even hate, to tone it down for group acceptance=not such a good idea.So keep on keepin on painter dog. I got something out of both painter dogs opinion and cathy's, even though they are on opposite sides of this. That is the beauty of it all.
Mindy,
Saw your work at the current show at Hirshorn. Congratulations! Glad to see one of my classmates at MICA makes it big -- Gives the rest of us hope~ Would love to go to NYC to see your current Solo show before it's over.
Ming
i think this is really crap and unimaginative. It's stuff like this that makes me not want to go out to shows - it doesn't do anything for me. But I'm an amateur so heck what do I know? Haven't you got any more Lucian Freud posts? or another really good painter is Tai-Shan Schierenberg - he's much better than this crap that's for sure.
Post a Comment