artblog

Saturday, October 04, 2003

In tune with First Friday in Old City

 

First I have to confess that I am writing only about Cherry and 3rd Street in Old City on First Friday because I dashed from Swarthmore to First Friday to a Diane Reeves concert, which meant I never got to 2nd Street. But fear not. Roberta got there and will add to the First Friday news.

The first gallery I visited was lit by wonderful found-object lamps by Warren Muller. Bahdee Bahdu is his gallery, and it shows a mix of functional and non-functional art and art-furniture. The pieces in the gallery, said Muller, were supplied by his network of artist friends--which doesn't make it any less than swell, since they're all seasoned pros like Isaiah Zagar and Burnell Yow!--but look for a curated show there in December.

The atmosphere in there was clubby and festive, with a couple of great musicians (shown from left, John Kennedy and Heath Allen)playing some nice jazzy stuff.

The music theme continued on Third Street with two outdoor groups, one serenading in front of La Ghiottone restaurant, and another rocking in front of Well Fed Artists Gallery(shown).

At Well Fed, a co-op which shows work by a bunch of young artists squeezed into a gallery the size of a bathroom, the art is crammed up and down on the walls. Lots of surprisingly traditional landscape paintings and photos filled the walls, plus cartoons, drawings, etc. The standout landscapes were on the back wall toward the left. The Dutch landscape coloring--brown earth, barely blue sky--was reduced to small vertical paintings that suggested wide spaces. (I don't know the name of the artist, but as soon as I find out, I'll add it to this post). The big advantage to a place like this is youthful exuberance and low prices. So if you know what you like ...

At Pentimenti, on the other hand, the show was devoted to work by one artist, each painting hung with the kind of care and reverence that's supposed to sell art. Swiss artist Franco Muller's acrylic on panel and on paper landscapes looked great, with a wiped paint look and beautiful grayed-out colors suggesting urban industrial and post-industrial, uninhabited places.

Muller also had some interesting photographs in the back room, many of which looked a lot like his paintings. A video back there also had the wiped look, and sort of reminded me of my television when it's on the blink. Anyway, Muller's paintings were the strongest that I saw in Old City Thursday and Friday.

The austerity of Muller's vision stood in sharp contrast to some luscious paintings I had seen the day before on Second Street at ArtJaz. Artist Dilip Sheth's heavily impastoed acrylics on canvas (shown, "Out of Eden," on canvas) and painted-over giclee prints have a clear fauvist ancestry. Sheth, however, prefers to think of his work as untutored, said ArtJazz owner Pamela Brown. I'd have to argue with that, but it would be quibbling over labels--not so productive.

Sheth's colors are tropical outbursts, fitting for a painter who was born and raised in Ethiopia. But even though Sheth's landscapes are unpopulated, with a touch of the surreal, the spaces, unlike Muller's, are romantic and inviting. They reminded me also of Persian miniatures, and I'd have liked to see them shrunk down in size. Other work in the show included mergers of still lifes with figures (is that an oxymoron? well, you'll see what I mean if you stop in), also with a hot palette.

And changing my tune from landscapes to portraits, I had also seen some photograms Thursday at Muse Gallery by Neila Kun. Although I was a little distracted by the presentation (the graphic power of the painted-on edges of the photo emulsion and the bull-dog clip hanging method), I thought the images of clothes were successful as portraits of people and of eras.

permanent link  libby 7:26 PM
Comments? Let us know.  

Friday, October 03, 2003

Printed sculptures

 

I'm still in love with the thrill of opening a greeting card or book with a pop-up image inside. The engineering of flat paper into a 3-D "thing" invariably overwhelms the printed image that's being turned into a sculpture. Think back on all the pop-up books you've had. Can you remember what the printed image is on the paper?
So that's why you have to admit that Red Grooms' work (s something better. I can remember the faces, the magazines, the whole New York milieu. It's art.

Unfortunately, the small diaramas showing at the Print Center now are in vitrines. I understand the necessity--the fragility and value of the paper works, but the little glass box is so highbrow and cool, the exact opposite of the affect Grooms delivers in his compressed little scenarios.


Grooms' 2-D prints don't have the excitement of the 3-Ds, alas, and seem more conventional, but still packed a graphic wallop.

Upstairs, in the "Sculptural Prints" show, some other art stars are in the mix. But the pieces I liked best were by others.

Local artist Lynn Clibanoff contributed some early work-- paper, unpopulated spaces with little skylights creating a glow from the interior that are as pristine and surreal as her later work. I'm reminded of Mark Shetabi here.

And I loved the birds roosted high up in the room by Brant Schuller. There funny confluence of foam core, old illustrational prints in gigantic scale, and blocky wood roosts made me want to reach up and offer the birds my hand for a perch.

Daniel Sadler's "shabitat" little houses, decorated with photos of grafitti, old painted billboards and other marred walls, although rather simple visually, still offered a notion of home and hearth and raised questions about the what's valuable.

But the shabitats suffered from the same problem as some printed boxes and gift wrap. What's so interesting about a box with pictures on it. We live with advertising-laden boxes daily, and to my eyes, they felt like less of a treat than, say Clibanoff's diaramas. And the flat prints no way felt sculptural, so in this context, they felt like a cheat. I'd like to see them in a regular print show and give them a fair chance.

permanent link  libby 9:17 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Spiritual x-ray vision

 

Libby I love what you said about truth and reality and the mind of the photographer. Your words were in complete sync with what our mutual friend, photographer Candace diCarlo said to me when I spoke with her the other day about her upcoming show at the University of Pennsylvania Library’s Kamin Gallery. DiCarlo, who is a darkroom wizardess, changes the reality of what she’s captured with her camera using a technique that’s like “painting with light” she says. With bromide crystals and light she teases out an image that is a new reality -- one that she calls a “spiritual x-ray.” The truth in her images is a kind of shared psychological truth -- hers, the models, the viewers. It's closer to dream truth than to waking truth.

DiCarlo, whose shots of Mutter museum exhibits were included in the book and exhibit at Ricco Maresca Gallery in Chelsea says she’s getting her hands on Photoshop these days and is amazed by the program. But she’s in love with her poetics in the darkroom too and won’t be letting that process go any time soon.

Di Carlo’s twenty-yeaar retrospective opens Oct 10 with a reception at 5:30 pm.

permanent link  roberta 8:24 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Thursday, October 02, 2003

Photographic lies

 

Photographs have always been filtered through the human mind (shown Ansel Adams photo). A person in a dark room, making a print, has choices of how to proceed, and the result is a representation of those choices.

The idea that a photo is indeed reality is bogus.


The daguerrotype show in New York (oh, all right, I haven't seen it yet--I've seen the pictures of the pictures and I've seen other daguerrotypes, and I've seen pinhole photos too) only serves to emphasize this issue. The sharpness of detail of a daguerrotype is different from the detail of a 35 mm. reflex camera. Which image is the truth?

NASA's digital mosaics or composite images of space phenomena have the intention of representing reality. NASA is forthright about their method.

It's only if, in a truth-telling context, a photographer deliberately misleads, that there's a problem.

Digital media may make it harder to spot manipulation, and may make manipulation easier, but the fundamental issues remain the same.

permanent link  libby 8:59 PM
Comments? Let us know.  

Digital Sombrero

 

I've always thought NASA's Hubble space telescope was on one arty photo safari. This morning's Inquirer (page 2) brought more evidence to confirm that -- a photo of an image from Hubble just released by NASA. But did you know (speaking about digital technology as we have been) that those glorious images are composites taken by several cameras and woven together electronically to create the final composite image? NASA calls their photos mosaics.... read more at NASA's website. Click on the Hubble link in the upper right. (Image is the Sombrero Galaxy taken with Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys. Six pictures of the galaxy were stitched together to make this mosaic.)

permanent link  roberta 6:59 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Wednesday, October 01, 2003

Last call for Burwell show

 

If you haven't seen the Charles Burwell show at Sande Webster Gallery, due to end Oct. 4, try to fit it into your schedule.

The work has the usual snap and twang of striped layers obscuring one another to create a sizzle of depth and surface, a figure-ground tension, but this time, Burwell has stepped beyond his usual decorative and geometric shapes, adding organic forms, some more modeled than others, some just floating like balloons, that raise content issues worth cogitating.


The organic forms simultaneously suggest vulnerability and a determination to survive. They reminded me variously of bunny rabbits, babies, internal organs, sprouting beans, curling fingers. I yearned to take a couple of pieces home with me.

permanent link  libby 10:45 PM
Comments? Let us know.  

First Friday off the grid

 

So it’s First Friday this week and where are Libby and I going to be at 4:30 pm on Friday, Oct. 3? In Swarthmore at the opening of Carmen Lomas Garza’s exhibit “Como la Salvila/Like the Aloe” at Swarthmore College's List Gallery. (image right is Lomas Garza's "Para la cena/For dinner")

The Latina artist and educator whose folk-style paintings are like Grandma Moses only ratcheted up in color, pattern and mystery, will give a slide lecture in the Cinema next to the gallery. Lomas Garza’s an activist. Her paintings dignify the family and cultural traditions of Mexican Americans as a way of countering racial stereotyping and bigotry. The List show has a group of the artist’s paintings and prints and a Day of the Dead installation and ofrenda.

Meanwhile back in Old City, we want to catch the exhibit of Cuban folk paintings at Indigo Arts (in conjunction with Philadelphia’s third annual “El Festival Cubano.”) (Image left is "Infanta con Gallo" by self-taught Cuban artist Jose Garcia Montebravo) And we'll check out Matt Green’s exhibit at Cafe Ole (3rd and Quarry Sts.). You may remember Green from Libby’s First Friday post of 9/7/03. He had some nice, forlorn, Philadelphia photorealist landscapes on the sidewalk in front of the cyclone fence on 2nd St.. Good to see he's found a home inside for the paintings this month. (image right is by Green)

Finally, we may run over to the Fabric Workshop and Museum for the opening of “RN,” Mark Dion and J.Morgan Puett's conceptual fashion romp through the history of nursing uniforms with thoughts about nursing’s future. Call it the anti-Schiapperelli exhibit*, it will likely be little to do with fashion and much to do with concepts. Lecture by the artists at 6 pm. (Image is futuristic nursing garb modelled by artist and FWM preparator Joy Feasley)

*That's not a knock against the Philadelphia Museum of Art's Elsa Schiapperelli exhibit "Shocking"....I went and wasn't shocked but found it all quite interesting in a distaff sort of way. The Henri Bendel-like gift shop at the end of the show did give me pause. It's not that I fault them for having a little fun with it, pretending to be a department store. But I had to question one item that was specially made to promote the show -- pink women's underwear with the show's logo "Shocking" on it. The modestly cut tank top ($25) and panties ($25) were Bendel's in the price department but K-mart in their design -- not so classy. And how about the mindset of those who thought it funny? or hip? or shocking? to make them in the first place.

permanent link  roberta 12:43 PM
Comments? Let us know.  

Philly's not in Kansas anymore?

 

Post from Brian Wallace

Hi. Reading your piece on Art in Am and Philadelphia [Sept. 29]reminded me I heard last night (and confirmed via their web site some minute ago) that ARTnews profiles Phila[delphia] in their next issue...here's a snip from their site:

City Focus: Philadelphia
Strikingly Diverse: With its first-rate museums, thriving contemporary gallery scene, and rapidly growing community of artists, Philadelphia has emerged as a serious art destination [.]

Brian Wallace is director of exhibitions at Moore College of Art.

permanent link  libby and roberta 11:52 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Seeking meaning in the back of Art in America

 

Modern Art Notes' Tyler Green had this to say on his blog about our Sept. 29 Art in America post :

The magazines are in NYC and the magazines think NYC is all that matters because that's where the money is. They're wrong of course -- every time I go to the West Coast I'm surprised at the quality of what I see, even though I shouldn't be -- but how would they know that they're wrong when they're busy being NYCentric? Do the big art magazines even have West Coast editors? (I should know the answer to that.)

Frankly, I don't think that the magazine back-of-the-book reviews matter much anyway. ...

For the rest of his post go to >Modern Art Notes, Sept. 30.

permanent link  libby and roberta 11:27 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Monday, September 29, 2003

Art in America's blind spot

 

Here's something that has puzzled me for years. When you turn to the back of your Art in America, rarely is there an item on Philadelphia art.

This October issue is an anomoly--two shows reviewed, one the Stephen Estock show at Schmidt-Dean, and one the Thomas Chimes show at Locks!

But an analysis of this year's issues so far shows that Philadelphia fares poorly compared to Washington, Chicago and San Francisco. This year, Philadelphia has had a grand total of four reviews (the third, a Susan Fenton show, image shown and the fourth a Jane Irish show), whereas Washington got six, San Francisco got seven and Chicago got 10.
Furthermore, what gets reviewed in Philadelphia tends to be Pennsylvania Academy-driven figurative image-making, which, while certainly a Philadelphia strength, is not the only game in town.

What an outdated image AiA is sending to the world about the art scene--or lack thereof--in Philadelphia (shown, "My Stars" by Nadia Hironaka, two videos inset in the wall, reflected by kaleidoscopic mirrors, at the Fabric Workshop and Museum).

So I set my mind to thinking what would make a publication devote its precious space to anything.

For one thing, there's news values--great art work, surprising art work. For some reason, AiA has forgotten about the surprising part if it reviews only what it expects beforehand of what Philadelphia has to offer.

Another news value that applies is proximity. But Philadelphia is pretty proximal, so proximal that New York is comparing Philadelphia to New York rather than to comparably sized cities. Well, that's just not fair.

Then there are the money issues--circulation and advertising. AiA knows that we will still buy the publication because Philadelphians want to know what's happening in New York, especially because New York is close enough to visit.

Reviews of Philadelphia shows is not the reason most Philadelphian buy AiA. But for other readers who want to know what's happening around the country, AiA is cheating them of the lowdown on the Philadelphia art scene, which is pretty lively and thought-provoking, and is getting livelier every year. In fact, Philadelphia is an important American center for art.

And then there's the issue of advertising revenues. Philadelphia galleries do not put up much in advertising dollars, another reason a publication might pass on reviewing Philadelphia shows, especially in the you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours art world. But ethics aside, in the real world, publications need money to publish.

Philadelphia galleries need to step up to the plate and advertise--in the local papers and in the national mags. Advertising bucks are strong motivation for a publication to give space to a subject.

I find it hard to believe that AiA is plotting to diminish Philadelphia's place as an art center, to give New York's art scene a boost. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, and this one seems especially silly because New York's art scene is so vast that there's not much competition.

From New York's perspective, I'm afraid we look unfairly invisible, like that Saul Steinberg view of America from New York (shown). But Philadelphia has something special going on, and from here, it looks like AiA can use some 3-D glasses.

permanent link  libby 9:21 PM
Comments? Let us know.  

Tutorial on digital on the cheap

 

Post by Franklin Einspruch

Ditta - Let's say you were both a computer and a camera have-not. You'd have to buy a camera, film or digital, and they're about the same price. You'd have to learn how to download, clean up, adjust, and burn a digital image on one hand, or set up, light, meter or bracket, and shoot film on the other (which I was never able to do to my satisfaction, and burned a lot of film trying). Then there's getting access to a computer with Photoshop, which here in Miami you can do at Kinko's, or rent a lighting setup. So locally, at least, it's cheaper to deal with this digitally, and I found that it was easier to learn how to do it. Also - the slides I got back that I had made from digital images turned out great. The digital scans I have made off of my slides have been flat and a little neutralized.

Judith - I'm very much looking forward to your show here in Miami in December. [ed. note: artblog contributor and stained glass artist Judith Schaechter has a solo exhibit at the Bass Museum of Art in Miami Beach, Dec. 4-Mar. 7. The show will then travel to the Museum of Glass in Tacoma, WA, and to the John Michael Kohler Art Center in Sheboygan, WI.]

permanent link  libby and roberta 11:43 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Dubuffet takes Manhattan

 

When the New York Times "Inside Art" column mentioned "Milord la Chamarre," our favorite Jean Dubuffet sculpture--soon to be moved out of its corner, we hope--(see Roberta's post of Sept. 24), our hearts went pit-a-pat. According to the Times, "Milord" lived on Park Avenue, on the plaza in front of the Seagram Building in 1974. A great location in our opinion, and at eye level, too.

"Milord" is related to Dubuffet's "L'Hourloupe Cycle," with its jigsaw-puzzle-like shapes, and four of the Hourloupes were installed last week by Pace-Wildenstein Gallery near "Milord's" old site, on Park Avenue between 54th and 57th streets.

permanent link  libby and roberta 10:55 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Is it real or is it memorex?

 

Here's a slightly different angle on digital imaging that comes out of a couple of magazine articles I read recently. In the June, 2003 issue of the Atlantic Monthly, author Richard B. Woodward chronicles the story about some Lewis Hine photographs which came up at auction and were sold as authentic “vintage” prints made and signed by Hine but now appear to be forgeries, having been printed after the photographer’s death. It’s a good read about a smart bit of detective work on the part of a collector. (Image is Hine's "Steelworkers at a Russian Boarding House," circa 1908)

The article ends with a cautionary last word on digital technology from Grant Romer, head of the conservation department at George Eastman House. Quoting from Woodward’s article:

...Digital fakery, in Romer’s view, presents the “next “scary issue” for collectors. Since the invention of photography...it has been possible to photograph a positive print in order to make a negative (from which to make more positive copies), but not without a telltale loss of definition. Digital technology may soon eliminate that problem.

“From a good reproduction in a book you’ll be able to make a near flawless negative,” Romer predicts. “Right now, if I were a smart crook...I’d be making Arbuses in my basement. Will the paper fluoresce? Yes, but it’s likely that some of the prints she made herself would too. you won’t have to be a master criminal to pull this off.”


I’d just finished the Atlantic article when I saw a cover story in the NY Times Magazine, Sept. 14, 2003 with a preview by Arthur Lubow of a new Diane Arbus book, “Revelations,” a companion to the upcoming retrospective of the photographer’s work at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. The story includes a portfolio of never-before-published Arbus photographs ...and Lubow says the new book includes works that have “never been seen (or even, in some cases, printed)".

"Revelations" is authorized by Arbus’s daughter Doon, who is in charge of the Arbus estate. Clearly, these are not fake Arbuses or being touted as vintage prints but I found the introduction of new Arbus prints in the Times following so closely on my reading of Romer's words about fake Arbuses somehow eerie. (Image is Arbus's "Woman with a veil on Fifth Ave., NYC.", 1968)

permanent link  roberta 8:37 AM
Comments? Let us know.  

Sunday, September 28, 2003

What if we had a national cultural policy...

 

I’m reading J. Mark Schuster’s “Informing Cultural Policy,” a book I sent away for in a rush of excitement expecting some kind of recipe for the future of arts policy in America -- a kick-ass book on how to influence national policy.

Of course the book is nothing like that, being a piece of academic research documenting the cultural policy infrastructures in European countries and Canada, ie., how Cultural Ministries collect data on audiences and somehow connect it with funding for the arts.

But the book’s appendix had some of the forward momentum I was looking for. It summarizes a Dec. 2001 seminar held at Rutgers Center for Urban Policy Research (CUPR) in which a group of eighteen policy wonks from institutions like the NEA, the Association of State Arts Agencies and research universities convened to discuss how to apply the findings in America.

I’ll cut to the chase here. Basically, you know what they found: there is a crying need for more data collection on the arts in this country; there is a crying need to organize the ad hoc, grounds-up data gathering done now by non-profits and others; there are encouraging signs (coming out of the private sector) like the Foundation Center and the New York Foundation for the Arts' National Information Center for Artists which provide information on grants; and finally, government in this country will not pay to support any kind of research on the arts.

Bottom line, the seminar participants come up with a big wish list that is as depressing as it is long...databases should be centralized; linkages should be established among the federal, state and local levels; information should be communicated in such a way to create demand. Yadda yadda.

Pew Charitable Trusts, the big thinker and big funder behind this entire effort, is to be commended. (Pew commissioned Schuster’s study, supported its translation into a book (published by (CUPR) and helped convene the 2001 seminar.)

Ultimately, reading this book left me demoralized. It made me realize the impossibility of top-down policy making in the arts in this country. As for the grounds-up approach, emergence is a great concept --groups springing up and banding together to foster their issues and efforts but it's hard to organize up to the next level.

Speaking of higher level, maybe the arts need to be taken out from under the rubric of the NEA. Maybe, all those emerging groups, coop galleries, community arts centers and the like should be under the wing of the Small Business Administration instead. (Why not? They’re businesses.) Maybe then our business-driven government could find a place for the arts at the national table. Maybe then, the arts could be part of the country's plan for the future instead of its whipping boy. (Image is Thomas Struth's photo, "Chicago Art Institute," 1990)

permanent link  roberta 9:23 AM
Comments? Let us know.