Artbash makes it easy (and free) to create a website if you are an artist or an art gallery.

Get started on your website now.
 

The Rise, Fall and Reverse Apotheosis of the Domesticated Artist and the State of Cultural Entropy and Cultural Dark Matter as it Pertains to General International and Specific New Zealand Artworld Trends.

Forum > Art Theory and History

by Honeybunch
42 Comments
Article of the Month November 2007
Walter-Hopps It has been a long time since Jackson Pollack pissed in Peggy’s Guggenheim’s fireplace. These days, in New Zealand, we have house-trained artists sprinkling (metaphorically speaking, of course) rosewater on the high-thread-count Egyptian bed linen of institutional gatekeepers.

It’s not that artists have only recently become accommodating. Who - having frequented creative precincts - has not heard the art-telegraph’s beat, reporting every move of a curator’s safari, as it hacks its way through the undergrowth of an artists’-ghetto.

Who has not witnessed the demoralizing spectacle of artists voluntarily reclining on a curator’s procrustean bed – submitting their practice, to be lopped or stretched, to fit the ‘vision’ of an exhibition’s auteur.

Give the domesticated artist a show’s theme, a concept from a high-concept international exposition - or any brand of theoretical tommyrot making the rounds – and it becomes his expedient leitmotif…. the kind of careerist expedience that sends herds of hungry artists galumphing docilely toward institutional feedlots.

Unfortunately the tamed mannerists-of-the-moment and their imitation-of-art practices displace (like crude oil displacing artesian water) career defining monographic exhibitions or exhibitions which intelligently track aesthetic simultaneity and collectively embodied zeitgeist.

Hot topic exhibitions ( with banners that bray such drek as- nomadism, memory and loss, borderlands, and so on, ad nauseum) combust ‘spontaneously’ (as in ‘spontaneous’ anti-Imperialist street demonstration - in the old USSR) here and there, like summer brush fires. Man-made blazes that consume first the creative capital of major metropolitan centers and then move outward to ravage the provinces.



Anyone, in the know, will tell you it’s bad form these days to field individualist style, maverick sensibility, or for that matter, to articulate disagreeably, while in the polite company of a uniform group show.

Thematic exhibitions encourage conceptual and aesthetic homogeneity, and serve as protective coloration for otherwise lackluster practitioners – so-called artists who produce didactic works which are little more than leaky metaphors –decanting a would-be shaper of culture’s watery bullshit.


Publicly packaged exhibitions, arising from the internal consanguine dialogue of institutions must employ oversized pedagogic wall labels to help viewers differentiate one ‘cohesive’ artist from another and need offer audience-friendly (read condescending) palliative brochures, dispensing text that explicates the edifying social lessons the viewer is expected to take from the collected works. Television dramas work to much the same admonitory end – but do so without textual apologia.

Curators talking (it would seem, solely) to one another have decided (in the last decade or two) that it’s intellectually amusing, aesthetically instructive, or creatively generative for an artist (or group of artists) to interact with, take into account, institutionally front-loaded themes…….or to ‘creatively’ respond to an object or group of objects from an existing collection, or flesh out a skeletal bit of the history, retrieved from institution, city, or state.

Such presupposition, at its best, results in the colonial administration of the artist’s imagination, and at worst, proposes the wholesale replacement an artist’s imagination with that of an institution’s.



Thankfully - for arts administrators, grant-purse holders, and junketeering art-bureaucrats – the tenacious vestiges of the pseudo-utopian/puritanesque (Publically Funded Administered and Intellectually Framed) New-Art-World Order (stuck at the starting gate since the 1970’s) is the analgesic-of-choice for any pain (or second thoughts) brought on by the specter of socially ungoverned art making. Or, ( the horror, the horror) an unregulated and financially (thus socially) dominant art-market. A state of affairs syntactically personified (in uber-70’s-speak) as ‘commodification of the art object.’

Commodified art objects are manufactured with disregard for institutionally forwarded intellectual constructs – or should I say constraints. At times (accidentally of course) the works in question may even be at odds with ‘the-social-good’ – whose raiment institutions righteously don…the better to generate audience-based public funding.


PROGNOSTICATION
Inequitable social conditions (growing income disparity, concentration of wealth, etc.) are an unfortunately growing - and inevitable - phenomenon in New Zealand’s maturing late-capitalist society/economy – setting the stage for the weedy growth of its young(ish) art market - to the point of rendering institutional shaping of visual culture negligible. Public galleries having had a shot at being the tail wagging the dog, will go back to being the signifying appendage they have historically been elsewhere. An appendage signaling the temper of the (artworld) beast. Public galleries could also evolve to be the NZ equivalent of kunsthalles.

As in most international metropolitan centers, public art galleries, and museums will exhibit artists that have first been given imprimatur by leading galleries and influential (read wealthy) tastemakers. Such galleries will supply works to important collectors (primarily people gentrifying their wealth) who also sit on public art gallery boards. More artists will make a living rather than serving as (under-paid, part-time, disposable) content providers for institutions. The best free show in town will be at the dealer galleries rather than the public galleries.

There are exceptions to this (sort-of) cultural/malthusian scenario. These exceptions are - put simply – anomalous people. People who attract and accrue ( through strength of personality, intellect, and acute powers of perception) institutional and private sector influence – persons who also enjoy artists, talk and socialize with artists, and thus come to intimately understand art and its fiercely mutating language. Through such liking and attraction these rare curators, patrons, and dealers learn about and come to appreciate what it is artists do, rather than wishing to (from a willfully uniformed or academic perspective) impose some pre-fixed social or economic agenda.

Walter Hopps http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55497-2005Mar21.html is the prototypical personification of the type of person I briefly allude to here. Find that person (if she/he exists here), support, promote and rhapsodize about them to people of ways and means……and maybe, just maybe NZ will have something to contribute to the international art argument.

I’m going to end my little rant by – for no particular reason that I can fathom - cutting and pasting the Top 15 folks from ArtReview Magazine’s artworld Power 100 list.

*Please note that only two of the top 15 are institutionally affiliated – Lowry, from NY MoMA and Serota from the Tate, London. The rest of the top fifteen are drawn from the running amok free-for-all market (art, the new Fashion) that in part resulted from a giddy ape-on-the-loose response to years of art theoretical gulag.

1 Damien Hirst Artist

2 Larry Gagosian Dealer/gallerist

3 Francois Pinault Owner of Christie's /collector

4 Nicholas Serota Museum director

5 Glenn D Lowry Museum director

6 Eli Broad Collector/philanthropist

7 Sam Keller Art fair director, Art Basel

8 Iwan Wirth Dealer/gallerist, Hauser and Wirth

9 Bruce Nauman Artist

10 David Zwirner Dealer/gallerist

11 Herzog & de Meuron Architects

12 Ronald Lauder Collector/philanthropist

13 Richard Serra Artist

14 Marian Goodman Dealer/gallerist

15 Dakis Joannou Collector

Comments:
1 to 20 of 42
alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
By her deeds ye shall know her.

We wait on the messianic appearance of the anomalous individual to deliver us from mediocrity. I dont disagree with much of your erudite if somewhat low blood sugar assessment (bordering apocalyptic, if the appearance of words like 'gulag' are anything to go by) Honeybunch my dear new/old nemesis returned.

However, there is (at least) one significant organising principle missing from your trend assessment. That being the self organising principle of the artist in the wild, running in grubby undomesticated herds (as opposed to lowing in cattle pens)...those unstable but powerfully magnetising aggregations of activity and community that 'make content' not for institutions, curators or the looked for anomalous benefactor (however charismatic and benign)... but for their own edification and satisfaction. not sad gits alone in the bedroom typing with one hand, but lively passionate and obstreperous exchanges between equals.

There is no such thing as socially unconnected art making ...governance being a separate cauliflower altogether, that concerns, mainly, a subset of persons who want to be taller. unfair? maybe. everyone gotta eat too after all.

sleep well.
Honeybunch
11 articles & 65 comments since 26 Oct 2007
For Ms. Ali-bi

Lemme see, she leads with a biblical paraphrase - "By her deeds ye shall know her."
Should anything be read into that particular choice of new testament text ?

Further, what "deeds"does she refer to? Are words now deeds? ( I don't know, try emailing the national censors office).
Is parody now "slander"(?)....Ali-bi suggests as much in an earlier post commenting on my  pictorial parody of a public figure.

"We wait on the messianic appearance of the anomalous individual to deliver us from mediocrity"
Actually, no. And, may I note, yet another allusion to a biblical ( "messianic", messiah, schmessiah ) shmatte. 

I don't recall saying persons such as Hopps were messianic ( or for that matter even charismatic ) what I think I said was that he, and those like him, have strong personalities, enjoy the company of artists and have ( or have cultivated ) acute visual and intellectual perception.

Folks such as that are:  The people who have historically made a difference - take for example the
Guerrilla Girls. Every one of the girls beneath the monkey masks has/had strength of personality, intellect, and acute powers of perception -I've met a few in mufti.

The Power of perception to see that the only female artist showing at Pace Gallery was Louise Nevelson - a dead one at that & that precious few people of colour ( give or take a token ) were being shown in top galleries and museums.

The Guerilla girls acted in absence of  "community" ( Ali-bi uses the word "community" like it was a sacred talisman or a transformative religious fetish) that hadn't done a thing - for decades- in the face of shameful demographic statistics. Artists of the time were obediently queuing up and waiting for theirs - much like institutional soup-line artists of today.

Visual AIDS & Gran Fury were mobilized by strong personalities. such as Donald Moffet and Frank Moore. Leon Golub -arguably the Goya of our time - was a strong
( albeit quiet ) personality and was relegated - by the institutionals -  to a retrospective in Brooklyn, rather than NYC, for his powerful, ongoing, influential body of work. Edward and Nancy Reddin Kienholz were strong personalities. This is just a short list of non-domesticated artists who shaped visual practice in their time.


Now for you, Ms. Ali McBi

If, you had refrained from ad hominem(s)......"low blood sugar assessment", "bordering apocalyptic" I'd probably be gentler, and had not self-styled yourself as my nemisis, and self-styled yourself as an apologist for

The only thing SAD is your hopelessly romantic, inaccurate, hokey, compensatory and socio-economically counterproductive cliche about artist's "communities. i.e. 'I only make art for myself and my friends.' ( the failed artist's bullshit banner of choice ).

Reprinted, dear readers, here, for your edification:
"However, there is (at least) one significant organising principle missing from your trend assessment. That being the self organising principle of the artist in the wild, running in grubby undomesticated herds (as opposed to lowing in cattle pens)...those unstable but powerfully magnetising aggregations of activity and community that 'make content' not for institutions, curators or the looked for anomalous benefactor (however charismatic and benign)... but for their own edification and satisfaction. not sad gits alone in the bedroom typing with one hand, but lively passionate and obstreperous exchanges between equals."

That would have jazz-bo Charlie Parker playing, only, in living rooms, for his friends rather than ......., that would have Tennessee Williams writing, producing ( and arguing about in coffeehouses and pubs ) plays for his family and friends,
that would have novelists printing off their life's work at the local copy-shop and hand delivering a copy to their boyfriend's flatmate's sister. That would have Twyla Tharp hopping about on her bed with a couple of invited friends.

Let me guess:

You're an inveterate grant writer, for yourself and/or art organizations?
You sit on, or have sat on scads of art related committees?
Your work would probably be best described as a project - and might require or invite collaboration and/or community involvement?
You are site specific and righteously regional in more ways than one?
You think that art SHOULD  ( not could, may, might  - but SHOULD) be socially engaged/engaging?
You are a creature of geographically obscure residencies ( does George Soros ring a bell ) and exhibition venues?
You could be a poorly paid and overworked part-time academic?

So, Ali B....you're my nemisis, not........more like my amaneusis.

Schlaf gut  Ms.bi





  
escapees
alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
yee ha that was a good bite. prickly as always, welcome back the flaming swordswoman. (absoultely genuine welcome by the way)

now, lets have a look at the ideas here...
in my view your trend assessment although perceptive and thoughtfull was also very bleak and cynical. although you make the allowance that passionate, perceptive and intelligent individuals are vital for NZ to grow and develop artistically, you seem to think they are incredibly rare and precious. Im sorry you have so little respect for your peers, I dont share your generalised pessimism about their abilities and integrity.

yes the biblical references were intentional, also playfull, the bible does great apocalyptic fervour. I also had images of the three wise men setting out in search for the NZ version of Walter Hopps, so they could to tell each other about him/her and perhaps foster as you suggest. which is where the messianic reference came from. also intended playfully.

quoting honeybunch, " Find that person (if she/he exists here), support, promote and rhapsodize about them to people of ways and means……and maybe, just maybe NZ will have something to contribute to the international art argument."

I know how the word 'community' got a bad name in art, but forget about your predjudice about touchy feely nonsense for a minute and consider how practioners survive and flourish. Im talking about peer support and professional synergy, not group hugs and tie-dye. Innovation in art practice has never been driven by institutions ...inspired individuals, such as Hopps, may recognise interesting activity when they see it and work to bring it to public attention, but the genesis of those innovations is in studio conversations, travelling amid the weeds and uncultivated borders...yes those grubby artist communities you so despise as 'hokey'.

your trend assesment failed to acknowledge the generative role that artists can have, they do not only follow, they also sometimes lead.

no sure how you reached your conclusions about my supposed didactic intentions and views about regionalism, so wont comment about that.

finally, In response to your commentary and somewhat judgemental guesswork about my personal politics, practice and employment record: I would never expect gentleness from you honeybunch whomever you are. Im am obscurely flattered you spent any time trying to figure me out, although a brief tour of my website would have given you much of your 'insight,' so that was probably less of a time investment than it first appears.

Honeybunch
11 articles & 65 comments since 26 Oct 2007
You, whoever you are, have a website? What's the address....I'd like to confirm my guesses.

I have an artist's equivalent of Audubon's Field Guide to Birds, burnt into my bio-harddrive - which catalogues artist's characteristics, habitats, ranges, behavior, and more.........and you fit into one category
quite easily - thus my uncanny insight. Golly.

As far as gentle - my Good friends all refer to me as Gentle Annie ( Stephen Foster).....who happens to be the step-sister of Steely Dan ( the Burroughs character/object - not the band).

"I did not get my Spaghetti-Os. I got spaghetti. I want the press to know this."

-The last words of murderer Thomas J.Grasso, before his execution.


alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
some people give their names in their artbash profile, I do. google can help you from there.

you are very accurate in some details, way off in others. make your own assesment, if your curiosity extends that far, but dont lump me in with the soft relational crowd, or the windmill tilters association. Im too selfish and bad tempered for either of those. also, sorry, no free secretarial work available here.


Im not going to categorise/castigise you in return, not one of my hobbies (are all amateur ornithologists so touchy?)
although still enjoying the argument ...I do prefer less time talking about my many and obvious flaws and more about the art thing.

I know you are right about the influence of wealthy 'taste makers', but I dont think it is a closed system. fortunately. with that caveat I do think that NZ often forgets to look outward, stepping offshore, even mentally, can show the parochial goldfishbowl for what it is. pretty, but inconsequential


David Cauchi
9 articles & 122 comments since 9 May 2006
Ah well, it started off well.
David Cauchi
9 articles & 122 comments since 9 May 2006
In amongst all the invective, there's a bit of dodging by Honeybunch going on. The somewhat ingenuous '"By her deeds ye shall know her." Should anything be read into that particular choice of new testament text ?' is a case in point. I read it as saying that it's what you do rather than what you say that matters.

We've had some downright lying (as Nznancy pointed out on another thread). We've had some slagging off of John Hurrell's work. We've had lots of abuse. We've even had shameless self-praise. We've not seen any actual work from Honeybunch, unless you count that extremely lame series of pictures about some academic.

Much as I'm tempted to say put up or shut up, I think that'd be a bit unfair. At least this text was a lot better than that silly incoherent blog someone kept foisting on us.
Honeybunch
11 articles & 65 comments since 26 Oct 2007
"I'm sorry you have so little respect for your peers, I don't share your generalized pessimism about their abilities and integrity."

Artists, like all peer groups, are little better than their best members. I have had little (at least by choice) truck with the current ( or historical ) crop of life-stylers, ne'er-do-wells,  social refugees, trust-funders , remittance men, bored men & women looking for a spiritual epiphany , late night grant writers, the chronic artist's residence resident, the group show addict, the (may the Adversary fend them off ) installer, the site specificist, the 'public' ( as if there were any other type) artist, research and documenters, earnest employers of text, artists who put things in jars, retorts, or scientific looking containers of any type, sober-sided taxonomists, and all the other riff-raff that have attached themselves like so many sea-squirts to the hull of art'ship.

MFA programs have been (mostly) responsible for the proliferation of posers that choke art's less-than-august halls...... scaring off any right-thinking muse and lots of potential Real artists.

I'm not cynical about artists. I love, and my loyalty is, to them above all others. There's just so many freaking fakirs and sub-normal, adenoidal, mouth-breathers these days and their continued viability is due to the misplaced encouragement they get from granting agencies, artist's residencies, the purveyors of group shows and their mythological art "community". If left to their own devices they would die off like any other non-robust species – instead, like hot-house varieties they are sustained through harsh seasons and even (sigh) reproduce themselves.

The real artists I have known didn't have time to hang out in creative circle-jerks and support groups. They passed one another in the street, on their way from the day job, life's persistent interruptions, family and other personal commitments....on their way to the studio.

They had work to do. Conversations between two practitioners in the street included two private escape plans....from the conversation. The desperation in the back of their eyes was not for support, validation, and community but desperation to get to work, to get on with it and flesh out something that had been shaping up (in-head) in the off-hours. 'I like you mate but let me get the fuck on my way to the studio' was the conversation's common subtext'.

I'm not cynical, by the way, just skeptical.

That is why art needs remarkable individuals to - "recognize interesting activity when they see it and work to bring it to public attention" - and to sort out and deep-six the dross that threatens to bury the real deal.

Despite your reading of my take as barren and cynical I have no such opinion of an (authentic) artist's future prospects in NZ. While I abhor the socio-economic conditions that will give rise to an expanding and vigorous private art market here - I welcome the market itself as a cure (albeit a harsh tonic) for the the malaise of institutionally supported institutional-style art. So be it.

As for those who end up sitting outside the coming movable feast - whining, with their mates, about commodification - they will have the support of the 'arts community' and the righteous hope that a real oil crisis will put everything into realpolitik perspective again.

   
Dear David - Not Afraid to Use His Own Good Name - Cauchi……

“some downright lying –“ Auuuuu-gh.

“We've had some slagging off of John Hurrell's work.” –Unnnnnnngh.

“We've had lots of abuse.” – Aiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnngh. Someone quick, call the police.

“We've even had shameless self-praise.” – Criiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinge.

“We've not seen any actual work from Honeybunch, unless you count that extremely lame series of pictures –“ Ohnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

“Much as I'm tempted to say put up or shut up, I think that'd be a bit unfair.” - Oh no, pleeeeeeeeaaaase don’t throw me into the briar patch” (from Uncle Remus)

My response- aside from my gutteral/physical utterances when realizing the inappropriatness of my social deportment in previous textual outings – here on the very thoughtful and non-inflammatory Artbash.

I adore lying and liars.

I enjoy slagging off mediocre work made by flatulent sacred cows.

I give as good as I get – or was that I goof as git as I gaff?

No, no, I am quite ashamed of my “self-praise” – you see I grew up in an environment where one’s best efforts were greeted (if at all) with, “that’ll do.”

I don’t Have any actual work you loveable knucklehead(s)….never said I was an artist, now did I….unless I was/am “downright lying”.

No, David, be free. Let yourself beeeee, unfair. It feeeeels goood. Your going to like it. Trust me. Here, I’ll help you thumb it in. I’ll shut up now (for you) you big, beautiful, bespectacled, brute you.
amphora
mathew
3 articles & 203 comments since 2 Oct 2007
Institutionally supported institutional-style art----how could we tell what is meritorious without it?
ao
75 comments since 16 Nov 2006
Mild tangent here, yes (but perhaps not after all)... having just read this article - www.harpers.org/archive/2007/12/0081837 - and then reading arguments being made on here, well, I thought it seemed appropriate to link to.
cadmium hed
6 articles & 432 comments since 30 Apr 2006
Hey ao, reading that tangen(i)tal-arti-cull, brought 2 mind the screeds of glowing reviews for current NOW films that have ass-aulted my eyes of late with their mediocrity. Even though they did indeed have festival logos all over the posters. Is that part of what your flaying Honeybunch?, are we being told from all sides that these pieces of art are worthy of our cowering adoration when on closer look, yknow, with a scalpel or mallet, they are in fact LAME? Or even worse, just plain old institutionalised BORING?
alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
Honeybunch what does a Real artist look like to you?

I am reminded of an interview that Marshall Seifert did with Bill Ralston (back in the day when we had some intelligent arts programming) Seifert made the somewhat inflammatory statement that artists weren't capable of knowing if they were artists or not...he went so far as saying that if anyone was bumptious enough to approach him to look at their work he pretty much decided then and there they couldn't in fact be the real thing...because in his mind a Real artist was too busy working to ask for attention. He knew what a Real artist was and only he knew. a redeeming feature of his aggravating certainty on the subject was that he knew exactly what he considered worth getting out of bed for and once he 'found' it he supported it...putting his money where his mouth was

all of which has a similar ring to what you were saying earlier about real artists being too busy working to have conversations. what do you consider worth getting out of bed for?

a different tangent: its interesting how private market is often supposed to be somehow more honest or egalitarian than 'institutional' grants and endowments. In practice, as Im sure you know full well, the lines are much less clearly defined. Many residencies and fellowships are philanthropic for example...you already mentioned George Soros ... philanthropy is usually outright didactic in the sense you accused me of yesterday. ..ie the philanthropist wants to effect positive change and has firm ideas in mind about what positive change looks like. business sponsorship is also motivated by agenda, albeit a more direct mutual benefit equation than that of philanthropy

from the perspective of the primary producer, drawing distinctions between private and institutional in an arts economy is mostly a semantic exercise, for an artist all sources of income involve balancing politics and pragmatism to some degree.
the situation looks different from the consumer end of course..which is where we get into extended value judgements about what constitutes a quality and worthwhile investment.

alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
nice link AO, cheers.

from the article:

Updikes rules for book reviewing [adapted presumptuously for visual art]:

1. Try to understand what the author [artist] wishes to do, and do not blame him [her] for not achieving what he did not attempt.

2. Give enough direct quotation—at least one extended passage—of the book’s prose so the review’s reader can form his own impression, can get his own taste. [include good images of the work you are talking about so the reader can form their own impression]

3. Confirm your description of the book[work] with quotation [images] from the book, if only phrase-long, rather than proceeding by fuzzy précis.

4. Go easy on plot summary, and do not give away the ending….[go easy on description, and dont tell people what the 'correct' meaning or experience of the work is]

5. If the book[artwork] is judged deficient, cite a successful example along the same lines, from the author’s oeuvre or elsewhere. Try to understand the failure. Sure it’s his and not yours?

Honeybunch
11 articles & 65 comments since 26 Oct 2007
Sorry Alibi
I'm honoring my commitment to David Cauchi to shut up...since I'm not putting up. I'll write a review sometime soon.
Bunnyhunch
alibi
3 articles & 366 comments since 9 Oct 2006
ok HB. look forward to sparring soon.
parting shot for later argument:

honeybunch inferred from my statement that I value peer support as 'an obstreporous exchange amoung equals' somehow to mean that I think artists shouldnt show professionally
...a wild leap of logic with entertainingly wrong conclusion, quote:

"That would have jazz-bo Charlie Parker playing, only, in living rooms, for his friends rather than ......., that would have Tennessee Williams writing, producing ( and arguing about in coffeehouses and pubs ) plays for his family and friends,
that would have novelists printing off their life's work at the local copy-shop and hand delivering a copy to their boyfriend's flatmate's sister. That would have Twyla Tharp hopping about on her bed with a couple of invited friends."

crikey. I definately never advocated that anyone should attend family bar-b-ques, or 5 o'clock drinks as a substitute for their professional output. I was talking about the valued opinions and challenges (perhaps also leading to arguments in cofee houses and pubs) and the lead by example from the other people who I respect in my profession as a way to help me develop. these are people that I work with, we work hard together in near silence and then sometimes get drunk afterwards and argue a bit. wide ranging working relationships, not small local social relationships... big difference in both practice and implication.

there is nothing Mythic or Romantic about that kind of working relationship, I experience it and benefit from it. I know other artists do too.
nznancy
12 articles & 232 comments since 13 Aug 2006
"Curators ... ... decided ...  that it’s intellectually amusing, aesthetically instructive, or creatively generative for an artist ...  to  … … to ‘creatively’ respond to an object or group of objects from an existing collection, or flesh out a skeletal bit of the history, retrieved from institution, city, or state."
The current COCA slate works (on slates taken off the ChCh Anglican Cathedral roof because of decay and for a cultural rejig) would fit this description to a T?
nznancy
12 articles & 232 comments since 13 Aug 2006
The picture with words addressed to DC seems to be a feminist-reversal-of-roles-visitation, by a very touchy lair-lurker, H-B, crude and probably unfair.
And uncommented-on, before this.
Would anyone get away with it somewhere else?
yousaiditididnt
2 articles & 47 comments since 14 Nov 2007
nznancy, how would someone "get away with it" or not get away with it, anything for that matter, excepting cyber-crime (identity theft, electronic siphoning of funds) in cyberspace?

Are you proposing some sort of governance and policing of social mores, here or elsewhere?

My sense of honeybunch's post directed to David Cauchi, and its accompanying photo, is that of bawdy, tasteless humour.

Considering that Cauchi had called H-B abusive, a liar, and a slagger I think he made himself fair game for whatever followed.
nznancy
12 articles & 232 comments since 13 Aug 2006
It is interesting to wonder what the status of something untoward 'happening' to a real person by means of actions in a virtual world (internet), is.
I don't know, ysiid, what do you think?
H-B actually asked it, "are words now deeds"?
By the way, I think you went way over the top, ysiid, about DC. I mean he did use the terms you list, but it sounded much more mild the way he put it, though clearly he wanted to draw attention to the strange fickleness of HB.
(Are red rags, actions, to internet bulls?)
I still don't know what DC meant when he reckoned I'd said something about 'lying'.
nznancy
12 articles & 232 comments since 13 Aug 2006
H-B would rather we had "career defining monographic exhibitions or exhibitions which intelligently track aesthetic simultaneity and collectively embodied zeitgeist".
Discuss.
Personally, I'd like more of them, so I can get my bearings back.
Join or Login to comment
Page Loads
1 0 9 9 5