Jerry Saltz wrote a bit for Artnet a couple days ago regarding what he sees as an impending clash between idealistic and polemic academic ideas, and homogenizing commercialism. It’s pretty straight shooting, and encompasses our previous conversations about our perceptions of the art world here on “The Astromen”.
While Chelsea strikes me as some chi-chi approximation of a strip mall, in my opinion it is probably the most appropriate venue for the type of art that is shown, which is quite varied (taking in stride what the article notes about the infrequency of female artists, which is disturbing.). Mr. Saltz isn’t claiming the art isn’t varied, he’s claiming it’s conservative. This is fair enough, but is entirely contingent what one thinks is progressive. Variety and impermanence is far more important than some shining city in the sky, the Babylon of the article. Further more, I’d much prefer to have my art adorn strip malls and the gypsum board walls of middle-class dwellings, rather than temples (museums). In any event, I personally don’t foresee a grand assault on crass commercialism being launched from the various MFA programs and bohemian hip-kid cafes. If it happens, even, we won’t notice it, blink and the revolt will be over. That’s the beauty of the market. Technology and the fluidity of capital assure stasis in change.
You wouldn’t be able to tell from this write up, but I thoroughly enjoy Mr. Saltz’s writing. One thing is for sure, he isn’t the cheerleader that many other art writers are. I swear though, these guys are in a competition to slip into each essay at least one or two thesaurus words that no one outside of a doctoral dissertation would use. This article uses “sclerotic” near the end of the article. Any guesses? It means, “relating to the tough white fibrous outer envelope of tissue covering all of the eyeball except the cornea.” Which I guess means, “blind”.
Speaking of obtuse words in art-related documents, did we ever figure out what “Lapsarian” means?
Link to “The Battle For Babylon” by Jerry Saltz, from Artnet.com.
2 comments:
Very good post. Thank you for pointing out the article.
here's another good article by Jerry Saltz: http://www.villagevoice.com/art/0527,saltz,65589,13.html
here's a bit of it...
"The art world had a collective dream that chaos be banished from biennials. This year's Biennale is that dream come true with a vengeance. Counteracting Bonami's raging bedlam, Rosa Martinez and Maria de Corral have given the art world the order it yearned for. This kind of reverse logic is typical these days. At this Biennale one of the worst pavilions, Annette Messenger, won the prize for the "Best Pavilion." This is because these accolades are awarded by curators and museum types who are completely involved in the minutia and politics of these things and who choose things only curators could like.
Corral's show in the Italian Pavilion, "The Experience of Art," has moments of revelation and thoughtfulness. William Kentridge, an artist who I thought had slipped into a downward spiral, showed new work in which he seems to shaking a number of his formulaic tics while also trying to probe his own processes. Martinez's "Always a Little Further" in the magnificent Arsenale veers from bland to bad. Critics have praised it as "sober," "sensible," "orderly," and "adult." Maybe I missed the memo, but I don't remember these being positive artistic traits. I thought we were after vision, originality, risk, and surprise.
Martinez's show represents the revenge of the professionals, the apotheosis of the managerial."
Post a Comment