The Daniel Laskarin Exhibition: Final

The Art Gallery of Greater Victoria is presently hosting a variety of art exhibitions, one of which is named Agnostic Objects (things persist). It has run since October 8th and will go until January 30th 2011. The artist’s name is Daniel Laskarin, and his work is object-based and conceptually rooted; http://finearts.uvic.ca/visualarts/facultystaff/dlaskarin/ . Laskarin has been exhibiting since 1983 and graduated from Simon Fraser University in 1985 with a background in Fine and Performing arts, as well as Visual arts. Laskarin’s exhibitions have previously been welcomed in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, Las Angeles, France, and more. He has taught art and sculpture at SFU, ECIAD, and currently teaches at the University of Victoria. His work is often constructed to provoke the perceiver’s impressions in diverse ways; the objects are notorious for utilizing a great deal of uncertainty, doubt, and ambiguity while simultaneously portraying evocative comeliness. “I’m somebody that thinks about things, and then makes things- what I wanted to get out was beauty and horror at the same time”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLoYIOWF1c His current showing at the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria is a presentation that will feature a selection of new works as well as a number of pieces constructed over the last decade. The art gallery’s website illustrates that his pieces “offer us physical feedback through which we feel our own bodies, our own being in the world”. http://aggv.ca/exhibitions/daniel-laskarin I found this statement to be an exciting precedent of inspiration prior to walking through the exhibition. When I arrived at the art gallery, I was instantly filled with curiosity and an eagerness to see what these unordinary objects could do for me. A plaque inside the gallery states, “Laskarin’s work maintains that our physical relationship to the world and the objects that inhabit it all contribute to how we define and create an understanding of ourselves.”  A wordy and intricate presumption indeed- I couldn’t wait to put it to the test.

I found it reassuring to note that Laskarin’s primary motive in sculpture and art formation is to “set out to create objects which might look almost recognizable, but never quite identifiable”, as stated on the gallery website. In essence, this quotation dictates the feeling drawn over me when I entered the first room. I felt immediately overcome with scepticism and disbelief because everything appeared slightly familiar, yet foreign; unanticipated, and strange. I recognized several chair-like figures, as well as other common geometrical shapes; however, each piece appeared to be tainted with an awkward peculiarity. Some objects were tilted on uncomfortable angles, others teetered in fragile motion. Structures of various sizes and colors were seemingly randomly placed; some stationary and bold, and others quaint with material. Simply put, the objects in the first gallery, named Centennial Gallery, did appear to just randomly “exist” or inhabit this open white space comprised of high ceilings and noticeably loud ventilation. On the other hand, there was one structure that struck me as arrogant, boastful, and, oversized. It commanded my attention over and above any of the inferior figures in my peripherals. I pushed forward to examine the most extravagantly outsized chair I have ever seen named, “Now Beacon, Now Sea”. [172 x 113 x 84| 246 cm high| Steel, thermoplastic, fabric]. I stood five feet away in an effort to examine its three-dimensional structure; it stood tall, elevated, and chromatic. The large chair’s steel had been ravaged by gunshots and each penetration was somehow encapsulated in the steel’s definition. Moreover, the blasts of the bullets seemed to be “frozen” in each direction they were shot- it was an incredible technique. Most significantly, though, was the prominent feature of sleek and luxurious  fabric wrapped particularly around the chair- it was pinned carefully, as to be held precisely in bunches. The chair was completely contradictory- sharp and jagged steel swathed in smooth and silky posed material. I felt a compulsive desire to reach out and touch the bizarreness of this contrast of textures, however, resisted the urge and chewed over my perceptions. The chair ultimately suggested to me an underlying nature of royalty- elevated, contradictory, untouchable, and immortal. In this gallery of “industrial-like” objects, this particular piece was undoubtedly my favourite in the room. It suggested to me a whirlwind of evocative qualities, and it personifies aspects of violence, times of war, and reign throughout historical periods.

Upon walking into the Ker Gallery, I was immediately struck again by a protagonist monument located in the center of the seemingly larger gallery. I felt again obliged to pursue this extraordinary attention-starved object. My first impression of this piece named “Turny Girl” was that it evoked perceptions of a “futuristic Mona Lisa” because the woman on the TV appeared to systematically flash her eyes back at me when I circled around the orbit’s circuit.  It became evidently impossible to give primary justice to other works in the room; here is six-foot pink armature, mounted on a soft sculpture base that looks something like a child’s beanie bag. The materials used for this object were primarily powdered aluminum, fabric, and a DVD for the television screen. The pink sphere rotates, and within the orbit a video panel is fastened which continuously shows the rotating image of a daunting woman staring back at me. I found it extremely unnerving every time the featured person caught my eye because she had a boyish presence and an abrupt glare. I decided after this piece, that I would conclude my first visit to the art gallery after the bizarre impression that Turny Girl had left me. I would come back for a second visit soon after I internalized more research on the artist, in an attempt to understand his work more efficiently. I went onto the artist’s website http://www.laskarin.ca/ because I was little hesitant in my ability to appreciate the exhibition- one of his quotes reassured me that it was normal to feel the way I did. ”The works I make set out to generate their own conditions of physical and imaginative experience. They confirm our existence while resisting definition. To address them is to physically experience doubt – and to proceed through that to creative uncertainty with all its imaginative possibilities.

I visited the art gallery about a week later. The plan was to acknowledge my uncertainty and verify that it was a normal reaction for this kind of art exhibition. I challenged myself to derive creative and imaginative possibilities from doubt this time around.  Anticipation was evident toward the prominent structures in both rooms. In entering the first gallery again, I genuinely attempted to be wowed by some of the other objects, however, remained particularly favourable to “Now Beacon, Now Sea”, and decided to accept it as the monument that I could appreciate. In recognizing this a second time, I felt a familiar sensation- something of an alienated host greeting me again. I later discovered that the compelling chair was inspired, in part, by a scene from 1991 blockbuster Silence of the Lambs.

I came to a broad generalization of the Centennial Gallery.  The room was comprised mostly of industrial-type objects; things that could serve as memorable visionaries from the 19th century. Objects appeared to resemble such things as textile machinery, horse-feeders, and agricultural crates. While scanning the room again in search for anything overly intriguing, my attention became drawn towards the repetition of a familiar lullaby which I could recall from the previous visit. To my surprise, it was in fact one of Laskarin’s pieces named “Row your boat” which was created over a decade ago. A sound tape loop plays “Merrily, merrily, merrily, Life is but a dream”. I immediately got the sense that the young child’s voice had a strong connection to the artist. Coincidentally enough, after reviewing a website on the artist, I found out that it was in fact his daughter at two-and-a-half who continually sings the nursery rhyme. This particular piece of work was extremely alluring, and I now realized that it acted as a good transition piece to enter the second room- the uncanny tape loop was musical, electronic, and novel in that it didn’t seem to belong with the other objects in the room. It allowed me to shift my attention towards what the next room, or to see what the “future” had in store.

The Kerr Gallery was presented to me in the exact same way again. I noticed that the ventilation was not as loud as the first room, but instead the silence filled with the rotation of Tunry Girl. I find this piece extremely intriguing because depending on where I stand, she will stare at me in a different way. When I walked around the object again, I began to feel nauseous and interpreted it as something significant. Apparently this was a noteworthy reaction because, as Laskarin has stated, “we know that we’re alive when we get physical feedback from the world”. In contrast to the Centennial Gallery, I see the Kerr Gallery as representing a whirlwind of technology taking over in the 20th century. I have internalized it as “the now”, the present, and the future. The evolution of structures featured in the Daniel Laskarin exhibition demonstrates numerous contrasting qualities which compliment the overall experience.

I became curious as to where Daniel Laskarin gets his inspiration from, and did some follow up research on his exhibitions. His work is very comparable to an artist named Jennifer Hutton, a Toronto based writer and artist. The two artists collaborated in exhibition September 11th-November 7th 2009. Her art is also thought-stimulating; comprised of simple objects which collectively form a greater picture. www.jenhutton.com Her project Things, not pictures features a widespread series of clear plastic pushpins displaying that very title. This sort of display is simplistic, yet perception-provoking and analogous to the work of Daniel Laskarin. Their work is designed not to keep secrets, nor to be passively present in the space, but to be alive vicariously through the art. Each abstract piece of this particular stylistic way of art is created purposely; allowing the perceiver to feel life differently, if just for a moment.

[Word Count] 1663

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

commentaries on three student exhibition reviews

http://michellekb.wordpress.com/

http://jdubxo.wordpress.com/

http://garlicjamfan2000.wordpress.com/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Responses to three contemporary blog reviews

Jill Conner on the legacy of Max’s Kansas City as exhibited in recent NYC shows.

http://whitehotmagazine.com/articles/howard-gallery-steven-kasher-gallery/2153

In this art blog, Jill Conner acknowledges “New media” in contrast to “Max’s Kansas City” which dates from 1965 to 1974. It is suggested in this article that new media is the actual problem towards the de-centralization of the art community; the lack of individual expression. Instead, Conner states that in the contemporary art community, “everyone is in search of “the scene”. I’m assuming this means, “whatever’s hot right now” or “whatever the current trend is”.

On the contrary, Conner’s blog demonstrates that Max’s Kansas City was a place that artists could join and express their unique individuality and collaborate different genres and debate ideas. This suggests her appreciation of this era’s excitement and passion for culture. “When you have a real bar culture, many people and things that look seemingly antithetical, in fact are not, because there is a common ground to deal from.  And it didn’t have very much to do with the market.  It might have had something to do with prestige, but prestige in those days had very little to do with financial success.

– Lawrence Weiner

In a way I feel that Conner is stating in more or less words that the Max’s Kansas City era, being “the beginning of the end”,  was the superior realm of the art community and therefore anything subsequent to it is generic contemporary rubbish. I may be putting words in her mouth but I feel she is reminiscing on historical trends and inflating how “things used to be better”, and therefore challenging the status quo, as opposed to accepting contemporary tendencies.

Christine Clark’s profile of Tara Juneau undertakes a debate about the importance of skill.

http://artinvictoria.com/2010/11/01/tara-juneau-the-warrior-princess/

This blog is so interesting to me. I love the way it is written- the style is very inviting for me as it isn’t totally formal, yet it is very informative. It is like a documentary style read, which I prefer entirely.

Christine Clark states that there is a major problem in the contemporary art community whereby realism paintings are seen as old fashioned and less skillful. After visiting the home of Tara Juneau, Christine knows that this just isn’t so- and that people are too quick to judge “what real skill is” based on what society and evolution favor at any given time.

After reviewing Juneau’s work, it became evident to Christine that realistic paintings, such as the impossibly original life-size nude photo of the artist- takes discipline- cold, hard, discipline.

New media becomes an issue here, because “technology can do this now”- when referring to realistic drawings.

Apparently now in consumerism, people only desire what technology cannot produce anyway.

“the discipline and the commitment required to skilfully create realist images with paint and brushes is as important a concept as any other.  Discipline and commitment.”

the writer is challenging the status quo; sometimes art is entirely different than “fashion trends”. You can’t exactly rule out realistic art as untalented, unskillful, or as being old-fashioned.

She relates the requirements of what it takes to create realistic art with the requirements of what we need in the world today to make a change- and I couldn’t agree more, this is truly a fascinating metaphor.

Blogger and online columnist Bob Duggan exposes Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture at Washington’s National Portrait Gallery

http://bigthink.com/ideas/24989

This article was short and sweet, however also historically and modernly informative.

“Telling the history of art without the history of gay people is like telling the history of slavery without mentioning black people”

– David C. Ward, curator of Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture

This blog demonstrates the fact that differences in sexuality have been synonymous with art culture for centuries- we just haven’t been entirely aware of it. Hence the name of this art gala “Hide/Seek…”

Compared to other newspaper criticisms, this particular blog is very populist in expressing culture, media, social evolutions, and subjective impressionisms. Because of this, I am very interested in learning more about this particular art community- how they have once felt repressed and ashamed, and with this exhibition, are now free to entertain, educate, and shine brightly unashamed and very welcomed. The list of famous names go on, and they are now compared with the great names of heterosexual artists, as it always should have been.

In this blog, I feel that ‘New media’ is essentially the possible solution for the gay art community. In contrast to a time of repressed homosexuality, ‘New media’- in this sense (Hide/Seek) freely welcomes allows “shadowed figures to come out into the light”.

This Blog definitely surrounds itself around a celebration of the gay art community being seen again. Many famous (early and recent) modern artists are illustrated (some of which I did not even know were gay), and therefore reinforces the overall excitement and passion for this particular art culture.

In Hide/Seek, art history comes out of the closet and out into the open, working specifically in the area of American portraiture to give a general impression of the role of persons of sexual difference in the art we already know and love.

Ellen in Maui- my all time favorite homosexual 🙂

Compared

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Notes summarizing my plans for corrections of Assignment 3

After my re-reading:

I have decided to re-word my active present voice throughout the essay to one that is more past-tense. Originally, I was attempting to make the essay sound more intriguing, however, I think I instead ran into trouble in a few places as it is “very difficult to pull this style writing off in review form”, as one of my peers has written on my paper during a workshop.

Also, I ended up rushing the conclusion of my essay due to a short word count as well as conflicting additional coursework and examinations. I want to take the time to reconstruct my conclusion in a way that flows nicely with my essay and also revisits the main points that I demonstrated.

My professor’s suggestions:

Also, to elaborate on my conclusion

Revisit the October 19th guidelines (which I managed to skip over) and make sure that I follow them carefully in constructing my essay. This is my primary incentive to re-write this assignment, because I know there are some obvious guidelines that I can add to my writing.

More background research from artist as well as other artists in order to narrate my first and second visit.

Forgot the word count… oops 🙂

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Assignment 3: Daniel Laskarin

Natasha Mills

Assignment 3: Interpretive Writing

Daniel Laskarin is an intriguing artist who has been creating unusual objects for over twenty years. He has been exhibiting since 1983, and his work is purposely constructed to specifically provoke subjective impressions in the perceiver. Moreover, Laskarin’s collections are notorious for having a great deal of uncertainty, doubt, and ambiguity while simultaneously portraying evocative comeliness. Laskarin’s exhibitions have previously been welcomed in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, Las Angeles, France, and more. He has taught art and sculpture at SFU, ECIAD, and currently teaches at the University of Victoria. His current showing- Agnostic Objects (things persist) – is an ongoing exhibition at the Art Gallery of Greater Victoria, running from October 8th 2010- January 30th 2011.  The presentation will feature a selection of new works as well as a number of pieces constructed over the last decade. The art galleries website informs me prior to my visit that Laskarin produces objects which “offer us physical feedback through which we feel our own bodies, our own being in the world”. I found this statement to be an exciting precedent prior to walking though the exhibition. Upon arriving at the art gallery, I am filled with curiosity and an open mind that is eager to see what is inside. A plaque inside the gallery states that Laskarin “strives to create art which connects our physical relationship to the world with a defined understanding of ourselves”.

I found it ironic to note that Laskarin’s primary motive in sculpture and art formation is to “set out to create objects which might look almost recognizable, but never quite identifiable”, as stated on the gallery website. In essence, this quotation dictates the feeling drawn over me as I enter the first room. I feel immediately overcome with scepticism and disbelief because everything appears slightly familiar, yet foreign; unanticipated, and strange. I recognize several chair-like figures, as well as other common geometrical shapes; however, each piece appears to be tainted with an awkward peculiarity. Structures of various sizes and colors are randomly placed; some stationary, some with delicate movement. Simply put, the objects in the first gallery, named Centennial Gallery, do appear to just randomly “exist” or inhabit this open white space comprised of high ceilings and noticeably loud ventilation. Conversely, there is one structure that strikes me as arrogant, boastful, and, oversized. It commands my attention over and above any of the inferior figures in my peripherals. I push forward to examine the most extravagantly outsized chair I have ever seen named, “Now Beacon, Now Sea”. I stand five feet away and examine its three-dimensional structure; it stands tall, elevated, and chromatic. The materials used to create this chair are mainly steel and thermoplastic, which explains the awry nature of the metal. The large chair’s steel has been blasted by a shotgun one hundred times, and each penetration is somehow encapsulated by the materials definition. I try and connect the title of the piece to the structure in front of me- “…Now Sea”- the steel is somewhat brassy in areas and I contemplate whether this rusty appearance has a meaningful association to its name. Perhaps the steel has become rusted at sea after battle? Most significantly, though, is the prominent feature of sleek and velvety fabric which is wrapped particularly around the chair- it is pinned carefully, as to be held precisely in bunches. The chair is completely contradictory- sharp and jagged steel swathed in smooth and silky posed material. I feel a compulsive desire to reach out and touch the bizarreness of this contrast of textures, however, resist the urge and chew over my perceptions. The chair ultimately suggests to me an underlying genre of royalty- elevated, contradictory, untouchable, and immortal. In this gallery of “industrial-like” objects, this particular piece is without a doubt my favourite in the room. It suggests to me a whirlwind of evocative qualities, and I sense take it personifies aspects of violence throughout historical periods. As I scan the room in search for less obtrusive objects, my attention is yet again drawn towards the repetition of a familiar lullaby that I had become desensitized to from the moment I stepped into the gallery. I walk over to where this persistent and somewhat eerie sound is coming from, and to my surprise it is in fact one of Laskarin’s pieces, named “Row your boat” which was created over a decade ago. A sound tape loop plays “Merrily, merrily, merrily, Life is but a dream”. I immediately got the sense that the young child’s voice had a strong connection to the artist. Coincidentally enough, after reviewing a website on the artist, I found out that it is in fact his daughter at two-and-a-half who continually sings the nursery rhyme. This particular piece of work was extremely alluring, and it acted as a good transition piece for me to enter the second room as it was positioned next to the Ker Gallery.  Upon walking in, I am immediately struck, yet again, by a protagonist structure in the center of the seemingly larger gallery. Again, I feel obliged to pursue this extraordinary attention-starved structure. My first impression of this piece named “Turny Girl” is that it evokes perceptions of a “futuristic Mona Lisa”-It is nearly impossible to adhere to other plausibly intriguing works in the room; here is six-foot pink armature, mounted on a soft sculpture base that looks something like a child’s beanie bag. The pink orbit is rotating, and within the orbit is a video panel which continuously shows the rotating image of someone staring back at me. The woman on the TV appears to systematically flash her eyes back at me as I circle around the orbit’s circuit. I found it extremely unnerving every time the woman featured on the TV caught my eye as she had a boyish presence and an abrupt glare. It was at this point where I decided to end my first visit. I had been surrounded by so many impressions and decided it would be best to pay a second visit a later date when there were hopefully less people in the gallery.

I visited the art gallery about a week later in an attempt to try and decipher some of the questions left hanging over me. Was there a collective technique used in each gallery’s work that I missed? Why did I feel so overwhelmed the first time? Why do I feel so intimidated by the obscurity of this particular art show? To my surprise, I had the pleasure of viewing the galleries alone the second time. No distractions- just me, and my subjective impressions. This time through, I anticipated the prominent structures illustrated previously, as well as the strange musical piece echoing down the hall. I tried again to appreciate some of the other structures in the Centennial Gallery, however, still remained favourable to “Now Beacon, Now Sea”. I tried viewing it from another angle this time, and I could almost picture the presence of a spirit. It truly evoked feelings of historical royalty, while vicariously construing contradictions of life and death through its two mediums. The Kerr Gallery was presented to me the exact same again as well. I noticed that the ventilation was not as loud as in the first room, but instead the silence filled with the rotation of “Tunry Girl”. I find this piece entirely odd because depending on where I stand, she will stare at me in a different way. The two mediums and the color of this structure throw any decisiveness I have out the window. I am completely clueless as to where Daniel Laskarin’s motives are in designing this piece, however, I am still completely approving of it.  In contrast to the Centennial Gallery, I feel that the Kerr Gallery represents endless possibilities for the future. It is completely different then the first room in that the vibrate colours, motion, and technology all pertain to modern-day civilization. The first room represents structures pertaining to industrial and textile periods.

The evolution of structures featured in the Daniel Laskarin exhibition demonstrates numerous contrasting qualities which compliment the overall experience. I feel strongly that “Now Beacon, Now Sea” and “Tunry Girl” were meant to be the upmost prominent features of each individual gallery. Undoubtedly, they each represent an entirely different series and genre of work. It is fascinating to think that each structure was designed by the same artist. Moreover, I could not detect a connection of style and design between the two pieces- one very old-fashioned and pertaining to an industrial period with extremely contradicting mediums; the other is revolutionary and futuristic while examining modes of consciousness and fixation of perception. I am completely dumbfounded as to what inspires Daniel Laskarin before creating a piece of work such as either of these structures. There were numerous works in both galleries; however, I feel that it would take many hours of careful internalization to depict each piece credibly.

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Class Discussion

Today in class we talked about “awareness” of art in general- whether it be an art exhibition, art criticism, blogging, or just a single portrait or sculpture. Moreover, it is of significance to pay attention to what not only interests me, but to what may annoy me, provoke arousal, or even be portrayed as evocative. When I enter an art gallery such as the Greater Art Gallery of Victoria (which, by the way I plan to visit more often as I have a years pass for just a dollar more), it is important to recognize that every visit is my own personal and unique experience- my own moment, and it is a contemporary one. So many art critics, such as Loveink or Jennifer Allen, imply resistance of the evolutionary and societal changes that are currently altering the shape of today’s art world. I think it is important to accept contemporary trends and internalize whatever art it is you are looking at- whether it be good emotions or bad- at face value. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

State of the art criticism

This particular art criticism by Lovink was very intriguing to me because I am somewhat of a pro-technology and contemporary person. I am enticed by naturally occurring trends in civilization, and I believe that everything happens as it should. Change is good. New is good. If the majority of the masses are happy being tech-savvy business people and socialites, then that is what the fate of modern-day society is, and it too will change somewhere along evolution’s path. Moreover, I was interested to hear what Lovink had to say in regard to the evolution (or negation, for that matter) of art criticism due to changes in society.

He begins by stating the obvious- that civilization has been overcome by the relentless “World Wide Web” and been impacted by technology, and as a result this has caused the “death of the art critic”.  Now aside from sounding completely old-fashioned and referring to the internet as the World Wide Web, and suggesting that the impact of technology has been a negative one, I have to make a vital correction to his argument. As a student taking inferential statistics at the moment, I am somewhat bothered by his claim stating that technology and the invention of the web has caused the death of the art critic. There are so many other variable that would have to be rigorously tested and ruled out for him to make a statement such as this valid. I do realize that the fact of the matter is that art criticism has died, or at least has seriously depleted. But could the reason be that socialism, evolution, and politics are just naturally taking their course? Should we really be resisting the onset of new trends just because we are afraid of change?

Whether or not new media is the actual problem, or a new solution for art criticism is unknown. A clear-cut answer will never be definitive, and it is a waste of time trying to revive old procedures and methods of art criticism, because the tech-savvy revolution is here to stay- at least for now.

I like the quote in this criticism by Jennifer Allen which states, “If it’s crap why talk about it”. That is so blunt and honest, and completely accurate. This is referring to the evolution of blog writing and why is almost now, a preferable title over being an “art critic”. There is too much negativity surrounding an art critic, while blogs are based more on central positivity- things that are liked, evocative, or which provoke arousal.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Critics vs. Bloggers

There is some ambiguity when distinguishing what it means to be an art critic as opposed to what it means to be an art blogger. It is interesting to note that the two connotations should theoretically be synonymous; there is no definitive “right” and “wrong” in the world of art criticism, and therefore anyone and everyone is entitled their own opinion-however, the two titles are commonly tainted with two separate underlying values. The way I see it, art critics like to play devil’s advocate in their opinion towards an art show, a particular art piece, or even a general art debate. They aren’t exactly seeking approval of the majority, but instead excel (most of the time) in being well-spoken, and manipulative- which usually does grant them a fair deal of approval in the end anyways. In contrast, I feel that art bloggers lean more towards seeking a collective agreement of the public. Whether it be for art criticism or just sheer online networking- blogging is a an open-minded opportunity to speak one’s opinion while at the same time seeking out the possibility that others will relate to your voice. There’s something about having shared values, opinions, and relations with others that comes naturally in humans, and I think blogging is one way of expressing that. Moreover, I think that the initial motive of art critics and art bloggers is entirely different.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Holland Cotter- Naked Museum

How interesting this article was! Never have I heard of such an unusual exhibition as Tino Sehgal’s- it’s truly hard for me to accept classifying this sort of performance as “art”. My whole life growing up, art itself was deeply ingrained as a tangible piece of visual pleasantness. And to narrow even further, I would consider only paintings, sculptures, sketchings, and drawings to be classified as “art”. Things like dance, theatre, creativity, politics, and the like have always been categorized into a different intuitive concept for me. However, this criticism opens my eyes to a whole new horizon of possibilities as to what “art” itself is. I feel as though I would need to see this exhibition for myself to see what all the hype was about. It is interesting that this young artist has collected such an extraordinary fan base through exposure already. The criticism does a good job in telling of the historical background of the artist. It also is very descriptive in painting a picture of what it would be like to go up and down this ramp, which aids in visualizing the artist’s work.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Jerry Saltz- Let’s reconsider

I definitely liked this writerly criticism more than the last article I read- although I definitely am speculative towards some of the things that Jerry Saltz had to say about Marlene Dumas. He starts off his criticism with an animated voice- one that is easily readable and somewhat intriguing. His speech is inviting because he starts off his criticism by directing stabs at the artist on hand. Then he refers to her fan base and how they have attacked him for saying anything about her, and referring to him as “sexist”. He immediately becomes defensive in his article. Personally, I don’t believe that sort of voice is appropriate nor relevant to the work at hand- nonetheless he proceeds to deny their accusations and follows this topic by inviting into conversation a few things that he may, perhaps, enjoy about Dumas’s newest exhibition. I am curious as to how genuine his comments are, and whether or not he is just retracting some of his harshness from previous criticism as a journalist.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment