Comments on: Episode 143: Roundtable fun!

By: Christopher Robbins

Christopher Robbins — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:08:18 +0000

I have a question that may shed some light on this whole provincialism question: did anyone *not* from chicago appreciate this show? I am from NY, and can say, though I listen to every, this was one of my less favourite.

And a reminder: chicago is in Illinois.

By: The Shark

The Shark — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:16:19 +0000

Tom, cannot be said much better.

By: tom sanford

tom sanford — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:33:31 +0000

I just revisited this very interesting round table, good job Duncan.

One thing that irritated me was the suggestion that market exposure is inappropriate and even damaging for young artists. It seems to me that this opinion is most often held by cloistered academics who have little experience with this aspect of the machine of art.

As a practicing artist I have found that support from the market has allowed me the time to develop my work and devote much more energy to it than I would be able to if i had to work to support myself outside the studio. In fact in my limited observation in school and among my peers, this is by far the most important ingredient in an artist’s development. This is not to say that sales lead to improvement in art, but they can afford an artist the recourses to invest (both time and money) in her work. The dealers I work with have never tried to influence what I do in the studio and have always worked hard to support whatever course my work goes – admittedly my career spans less than a decade so things could change.

Grad students and young artists need money to survive and invest in their work just as much as older artist and I never got any better as an artist while i was on an art handling gig. I would strongly encourage a young artist to “go pro” as early as she can, and then work her ass off to keep the job.

By: katherine

katherine — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:39:17 +0000

I just finally had a chance to listen to this episode and the discussion it prompted (both of which I thoroughly enjoyed, btw.) I wish I could say that I’m not just another Chicago-artist; but I am, though hopefully not here merely to gripe. As all of you well know this Chicago issue is a long-standing one. However, I will say that having been here since 1994 things have gotten better. There are new ventures,venues and personalities popping up all the time. It used to really depress me how little respect Chicago got in the larger artworld context. But, as someone coming from out of state having already attended grad school somewhere else when I got here and not knowing a single soul in the Chicago “artworld”; from my outsider viewpoint it seemed very difficult to get any love when you didn’t go to school here (-and I’m not just speaking for myself, though it probably sounds that way-) and to my mind it’s very hard to have an art community of any depth based solely on artists just out of school who may not stay for long. It also seemed that attention and opportunity were jealously guarded to the detriment of everyone, including those who held it. That sort of atmosphere contributed to divisiveness and insularity which was not very conducive to the greater project of getting noticed outside of Chicago. Mark touched on this above. To my mind things are much more open now and I see a greater diversity of work and acceptance of differing opinions. I know quite a few LA and NY artists; they never complain (and never have to) about their “scene”. I sometimes almost feel proud to be a “Chicago artist” despite this. I think Chicago artists are often more rigorous in ways that LA and NY artist’s don’t have to be. I don’t mean to over- generalize, but NY and LA definitely have their provincialism’s and a lot of work gets noticed in these places that shouldn’t due to outdated but long-standing biases. I guess my hope is that while maintaining our criticality, we could do more to help each other out, along the lines of what Duncan and Mark were saying. Btw, I think BaS is the one of the most exciting things to happen in Chicago in a very long time. Because while irreverent, it’s still sincere and though critical, it doesn’t take itself too seriously-something that was all too prevalent in the past. I think we need more of it’s type of “tone” in the general discussion.

By: The Shark

The Shark — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:42:02 +0000

Thats great Paul -but, given what a venal, corrupt fraud Mr. Curator (lite) happens to be, we know exactly who ms Kirchner’s lapdog will show!

By: Paul Klein

Paul Klein — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 04:03:38 +0000

In the new wing at the Art Institute there will be 2 galleries dedicated to Chicago artists. One room will focus on the 60’s and 70’s and rotate pieces periodically. The 2nd room will be for contemporary artists. The plan is to not identify these rooms as Chicago-centric.

By: ben

ben — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:45:41 +0000

yes, orgies are cool. experimental interactions are lubricative even if certain people dont get off. keep pullin it!

By: Mark Staff Brandl

Mark Staff Brandl — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:59:51 +0000

It was a successful trial, Duncan. Do more!

By: duncan

duncan — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 17:45:55 +0000

Dan,

It was a trial. There will be other opportunities. Thanks for your suggestion.

By: Dan

Dan — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:05:08 +0000

Duncan,
I only meant that when you had three interesting critics, Lori, Kathryn, and James, in one room you didn’t ask them to name an artist that they’re excited about their work, or a cultural trend that’s emerging in art, or something that they want to champion. Clearly they might have different opinions about what constitutes something worth looking at and that’s what I’d be interested in hearing about. I wanted the subject and form of art, not only discussions of the form of the art community and market.
That’s all I meant. I think you missed a good chance.