Escaping Artist

Trying to pick openings of interest from the vast number taking place every month is a hard task. For my reviews I want to find something unique, but with little knowledge of galleries my base for judging that is faulty. I want to find something I know about, perhaps the medium, a few of the artists, the genre, as part of my advantage seems to rest in my knowledge as a maker. Overall, as far as it has gone, my goal has been to choose shows dealing with issues that are concerned with topics or events outside of the “art world”, thus dragging art by its reluctant collar into a larger context. After Nature was loosely tied in subject to the environment and our current relations with it, my second proposals were political and, I could say, eventful–the latter being the one I fought for.

The reopening of MAD in Columbus Circle has been discussed outside of the art context because of its location, and new york seems to love architectural openings and evolutions. Though I spend a decent amount of time in the area, I read about the building long before I noticed it. A white pillar of clever design, it now stands out in the circle, perhaps because its white exterior contrasts sharply with the deep black of Trump’s phallus. It was almost an afterthought to write about the opening of the new building and museum, but the more I thought about it the more appropriate it seemed. I have, dare I say, a personal investment in the discourse surrounding art and craft, and certainly a good working knowledge of those possible distinctions. Though the six material studies grads (including myself) tried our best to remain outside the shadow of “craft” and its reputation, it is none-the-less a subject I have considered to almost annoying lengths.

» Read the rest of this entry «

When Gregory used to say, “think big” he did not always mean literally, generally he was referring to a concept, idea, or initial interest, but most often it was accompanied by an expectation that as the idea grew so would the image—great ideas are looming in stature, he seemed to say. Though being forced away from a comfortable size was a necessary conclusion to my thesis, I still look for the place of small work in the contemporary art museums and the various galleries that now surround me. I wonder who manages to make small work and how they get away with it. Partly from a deep attachment to, and a convinced importance of, smaller images, and partly because they are so scarce. While at the art fairs in Miami Beach last December I noticed, at Basel most of all, there were very few images that spanned less than two feet. Though there is a relation between monetary value and size, there also seems to be an aesthetic and intellectual shift away from smaller works. Money and technology must be prominently responsible, but I would still argue that a different source of dislike for the small exists—one I feel is more significant as a viewer, and not as a buyer, of images. It goes back to the idea that grand ideas are grandly scaled, one that is almost as archaic as containing a painting within a gaudy, gold frame. With art institutions favoring “ambitious” ideas, and with the art market catering to large photographs of ambitious ideas, it is no wonder small images of “ordinary” things are far less popular.

» Read the rest of this entry «