During the first years that the NAE was published, it was delivered by car to the various outlets by Derek Guthrie and company in the rain, snow or blistering heat of Chicago.

In the early summer of 1976, Rizzoli International opened a bookstore in Water Tower Place. I was the first magazine manager at Rizzoli Chicago. A small publication distributor, BOB’S News of Hyde Park asked me to carry some of their independent titles and I did. Bob of BOB’S News was usually having issues with the Hudson News Company as he was one of the only competitors in the Chicago news distribution market.

Several weeks after beginning to receive titles from BOBS News, Derek Guthrie came to Rizzoli and asked if Rizzoli would carry the NAE. I learned that Derek or someone on the NAE staff would bring the papers on a monthly basis. I thought that the NAE delivery mode was ineffective. I suggested that NAE hook up with BOB’S News that delivered independent publications to a wide range of Chicago outlets. Soon thereafter, the NAE was carried by BOB’S News. Several years later when BOB’s News merged (not sure if merged is the correct term) with the Hudson News Company, the NAE had access to national distribution… hence, the multiple city expansion of the NAE and the eventual undoing of Chicago’s NAE enterprise.

Sorry…

Galleries open and close. Some people remain on the art stage longer than others and continue to tell other want they believe is true… their truth.

I remember the NAE as being one of the few art publications that centered on art in Chicago. Unfortunately, the NAE lost it’s mission when it spread it’s focus to other cities. Because, unlike Artforum or Art in America, the NAE from it’s inception was like having a barn with a fire in it. You can put out a small fire and save a barn, and, you can even rebuild one barn. But, when there are several barns in separate cites, it is hard to have a fire starter mentality and not burn out.

Regarding this blog… it use to be said that you should never fight city hall or argue with people who buy ink by the barrel.

I like electronic ink better… as long as someone doesn’t pull the plug.

K

OG

Money spent supporting a few very serious ezine websites -very tied in to analog events on the ground makes so much more sense. I feel that at a time when we really need your great energy here in Chicago -you are not thinking about what the problems are here -and why is it you believe resurrecting an old model will help solve them- I don’t think you are thinking through this very clearly -and I feel it is a waste of your time and talent-

http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/thebusiness/081211/

What will be interesting to watch, is the theater worlds response to all of this. Chris Jones and Hedy Weiss are huge players in the theater scene here unlike our art world, their reviews are important -and can make or break a play locally -in the same way that only a review in the NYTimes can make a play happen on Broadway/ become a national, international success- but recently, Chicago has in many ways become the first city of theater -challenging both London and New York -the rave reviews of our critics here for August Osage County -translated into even more effusive reviews on Broadway -culminating in a virtual sweep for Steppenwolf of this years Tonys -and a triumphant remounting of the play -to further acclamation, now happening in London.

My question then is this: if the papers fold, what sort of apparatus will be brought into being -in order to keep Jones and Weiss working here promoting Chicago Theater (theater critics here -unlike art critics, actually support and promote the plays they review-)….will it be online? There is enough money in the theater world to pay critics a salary, to set up a serious ezine…….

I think this thread has raised a whole bunch of interesting questions -for me one of the primary ones -is the leveling effect of the internet….John Link for instance; decent blogger -not a particulary interesting or skilled painter….does this matter? To me it does……it is personal -looking at poor work I cant see how it does not reflect upon its author…..and I am not singling John out for particular gnawing on…but the quality of his work for me has to have some equivalency with the quality of thought going on…..I think this is a common distortion we see on the internet -where everyone has an equal voice -whether earned or not-

I recently became aware of the work of another ‘artist’s’ ‘work’ I sparred with some time ago on artletter -a Steve Blum….not as an aspersion -but quite frankly, if I had seen the work, I would not have argued with the man -and after having seen it, felt rather foolish having done so….the internet is going to require a resume’ some context and hierarchy if it is to really take on print-

If artists are going to be writing, discussing aesthetics/ art world politics -whatever, online, the quality of the artists involved is going to matter – in experiencial terms.

I plan to explore both of these and several other ideas over at sharkforum where I have been on an extended leave of absence-

This blog is wonderful and many thanks to the Bad at Sports Team for putting it all together. I thought the interview with Derek was a good start in this ongoing discussion.

When I worked for the New Art Examiner from 1974-1985 beginning as distribution/circulation manager the scene was much smaller and new to me as I had recently come out of SIU where I didn’t learn much about the artworld in Chicago.

Derek Guthrie & Jane Addams Allen opened up a world of creative thinking, dialogue, expression and hard work, I felt the grassroots connection of people working together as John Link mentioned because we were all paid the same rate, something Jane Allen believed in, a significant tradition surely from Jane Addams, Chicago’s social worker.

It was a clear message from the get go that ads did not mean a review and there were many times when I had to remind some gallery owners of this, much to their disapproval. It was well known at that time that ArtNews out of New York did reviews for ads.

I was lucky to have experienced that chapter in my life as I witnessed dedicated, passionate artists and critics working together, expressing their views without fear and taking the flack when it came back in the form of letters to the editor or social reprisal. Yes, there was a lot of tension surrounding the publication of the NAE along with the heady, feeling of being part of something much bigger than oneself. The NAE pushed artists and writers to grow, think for themselves and create discussion and definition of what was important in Art.

I left Chicago to work for the NAE in Washington, D.C. when Jane & Derek opened the office at 2718 Ontario Road NW, in the heart of Adams Morgan, a lively, international, politically active, ethnically diverse neighborhood. The arts scene in D.C. was distinctly different from Chicago, it was sophisticated, and had one other art publication the ( I forgot the name) which covered poetry and art. Derek knew in order for the NAE to grow it had to expand outside Chicago and the MW he would say, we have saturated the market and rather than move into NYC, D.C. was the next best place to go, especially as the Endowment was centered there along with the WPA, it was close enough to NYC, Philadelphia and Maryland-also covered in the NAE.

After five years managing the small D.C. office I moved to NYC whereI Iearned another lesson about the Artworld. Like Chicago, NYC was a hard nut to crack, and most of the artists I met and drew or painted with did not have shows in galleries, provided their day jobs and mine did not de-energize them, there was some time left to make art in the evenings or week-ends. Many artists I knew had to pay thousands for exhibitions in SoHo galleries, selling work was another challenge.

Today artists are still struggling -more now than ever-in what used to be the center of the artworld. Most of the gallery owners I visited would not even look at cd’s or slides of an artist’s work unless she or he had a professional referral.

When the NAE was alive, it was distributed in Hudson River News at Grand Central Station, and other specialized outlets. And a few co-operative galleries did advertise. I met several artists there who loved the NAE and were saddened at its demise.

My experience is what can I say, inexpressible? It wasn’t just the NAE, it was Jane Addams Allen, who taught me how to write about art, she inspired many writers to blossom. Derek was my great painting teacher at NW, where I also had the privilege to meet Tom Zurfluh, a life-long friend.

Now I am looking at this “new” Chicago which is the same in many ways outlined above, yet there is a lot of energy combined with a sense of right timing that is exciting and creative. Now that the money game has failed globally, who knows, this may be a perfect time to start a New New Art Examiner.

Re: Academies- I replied on your blog 170

As for money problems and such at NAE — yes of course they always had a shoe-string budget. But when Derek and Jane approach the pearly gates — they may be poor, but they’ll fare far better than the glossies. There was something about the New Art Examiner that even when it was glossy it had the cheap feel of newsprint.

Thanks for spilling the beans……guess you just couldn’t help yourself could you? Your just so damned clever, the world needs to know…..

I

his one big accomplishment according to your scenario sweetie, is that he managed to lie about who he was and defame two artists simoultaneously..and you come on BAS bragging about this? You think of this as a triumph: what, a loser. I guess yours is the perfect type of post to label under ‘consider the source-

and btw if you are so f-ing dumb that you think I sit around and ’stew’ about this crap – its beyond stupid -into the realm of the sincerely deluded…..I suppose you make the traffic lights change by imagining another color as you ride your hipster cycle through Wicker Park as a way of exercising that mental prowess so vividly on display here.

I have detractors Beth -even a few that are worth mentioning -some whom I even admire -you don’t qualify in my world despite all of your self-important smarmy smugness- but, enjoy your one claim to fame dear -you exchanged posts with me on BAS -every life should have at least one such moment-

Shark…still hanging on to the words of my good friend Justin? Stew on my man!

“something that cannot always be said when it comes to my detractors.”

You have detractors? Imagine!

Hugs and kisses sweetie.

My email is tomzurfluh@comcast.net. Please keep me informed if this discussion moves to another location or if a discussion forum develops elsewhere.

While I also find some of the name calling and baiting tedious and not very informative in reasoned discusion, I am thrilled to see the many good ideas and the passion the very idea of a multi-faceted discussion forum has brought forth – be it print, e-based, or a combination. Where there is interest and passion, there is hope.

Tom

duncan.

To you or anyone: I hope Derek and I will be able to work out needs when he visits Miami later this week as my guest. I wish to provide him much-needed time to rest, but this is a pressing issue, and I will be open to opportunities for planning. Is there a way we can continue this community discussion after the comment section of this podcast expires? please assist to solve this dead-ending issue if you are able…my email is mworkman@bridgeartfair.com…it is a massive imperative, given clear notice as we have that the discussion has come under increasing editorial peril from the administrators. Please help keep the discussion growing, and by discusssion I mean just that.

And yes Fern, it was amazing that the NAE kept on publishing. Money seemed to be the primary obstacle. (I was on the board for a while. There was not enough money for the publication to purchase liability insurance, for instance, which exposed everyone to lawsuits, none of which ever came, fortunately.) Money will be a problem if the NAE or something like it is attempted again. The other problem will be finding good people who will do the work.

Michael Workman: I hope you are accurate about your assertion that you are able to put together that kind of funding. Are you talking about just printing costs, or salaries for the workers too? As someone said way back, just being in print makes no gurantee that the thing is good. There is a real need, I think, for something like what the NAE gave us, a place where the writing was first for itself, as opposed to serving a larger system. New Criterion comes closest to that now, but they are so narrow and repetitious that they only influence those who are already convinced. But they do serve themselves first (and are good wordsmiths). While I admire their devotion to ideals, I quit reading them years ago because their ideals come before their experience of art. The sort of publication I’m interested in is one that gives a voice to the best proponets of a wide range of ideals, including those of the New Criterion if they want to participate.

Mark: I am surprised to learn that your suggestions for intensified dialoge were not taken, at least for an issue or two. Just as they had an “education” issue and a “craft” issue each year, they could have easily had a “theory” issue. In any case, cooperation between the various entities you described should be fertile, without necessarily having any of them give up their own identity.

Kathryn: you certainly have a tiger by the tail here. There is no great choice. Suffering fools seems to be built into the nature of the web. I voted “sigh”. My sigh was so large in fact, that it almost caused me to refrain from voting. There is something insane about dots on the screen. They seem “personal” but there is no looking at the face or the eyes or the expressions or body language of the one who authors them, nor do the authors have acess tothe same characteristics of their readers. I know a number of rather gentle people who are terrors online, to my great surprise. I think they stimulate others in certain ways to react, and it can become a chain reaction that gets out of hand. If it’s your blog, run it like you want to. One technique is to shut down comments for a couple of days. Maybe you have tried that.

Well, cheers to everyone.

You really explained it well. It was exciting to be part of the staff making the NAE. It was amazing that the NAE existed at all. It was read by lots of people who joined in the dialogue with many points of view on both sides of the fence, it did not matter, it was the vehicle for discourse.
Fern

Defending my ideas and listening to others defend theirs was my first exposure to Derek’s love of discourse.

I was was there when Derek found out he and Jane had been let go from the Trib. He was genuinely perplexed as to why. I later came to know Jane as well and contrary to one of the statements above, I never knew her to miss a deadline – miss sleep maybe but not a deadline.

As a teacher Derek inspired such loyalty that a large percentage of the class, most of whom had figured to do a quarter or two, continued for quarter after quarter. Some of them have been involved in the art world to this day and done good things for the Chicago Art World. Arlene Rakoncay comes to mind.

When the Dean told Derek he was to be replaced the following quarter to make room for a recently graduated art major who could not find a job, eight of us requested a meeting with the Dean to argue for retaining Derek. Truly a weird meeting – she brought her lawyer! I never understood why.

When she would not relent, the same group went in with Derek, rented a storefront studio and continued painting and learning. A little restaurant with red and white checkered tablecloths on Halsted replaced Gino’s. It was there that Derek first proposed the idea of an art publication to encourage open discourse among the art community in Chicago. We all tried to talk him out of it on the grounds that serious publishing takes deep pockets and generally involves getting big money backing with an agenda. Who the hell was going to back a publication based on open discourse with anyone’s and everyone’s views aired? It simply did not make business sense to me as I have a degree in engineering, not art history.

But it did start; not as the NAE but as a 4 page mimeographed newsletter published out of a church basement on Fullerton by the newly created Chicago New Art Association. I still have a few but if anyone has copies I would dearly like to have them as part of hopefully someday putting together a full set of them pluss the NAEs to donate to a museum, whether that be in Chicago or perhaps the British Museum in St. Ives. (There is a rational reason behind the choice of St, Ives.) As best I recall there were two years of newsletters before the NAE was first published in tabloid form with advertisers and all the grown up publishing stuff. I served on the board of directors for over 10 years and still find it hard to believe it ever got off the ground.

True to their word, Derek and Jane occupied the middle ground, taking in and publishing all points of view, whether or not they corresponded to their own or somebody powerfull’s agenda. This made fund raising a bitch. The staff could take ads but could not promise reviews of house artists or promotion – or exclusion – of other artists, galleries, museums, collectors, or agendas. Sort of like standing in a glass box surrounded by a mad crowd with rocks!

The staff was only paid about half what they should have been. The only reason this worked was that everybody – Derek, Jane, and every staff person was paid exactly the same. Everybody shared the pain equally. None of us on the board was paid at all.

The NAE was always hanging on from day to day like a person from a ledge by the fingernails. Subscriptions were the primary income, which wasn’t enough – ever. Economically, the worst day came not from the advertisers, writers, critics or printers but from the US government. Interest rates on borrowed money were running 8 to over 12 percent but you could use your FICA money and only pay 3 percent interest, which we did. This was just fine until Uncle Sugar decided that everybody had 6 months to pay what they owed or start paying 18 percent. The NAE needed to raise about $25,000. That was done but may account for some of the complaints of writers and critics getting paid late. It was a question of survival. However, to the best of my knowledge everybody eventually either got paid or agreed to some sort of accomodation. If you sacrificed some in those dark days, thank you. For without everybodys’ sacrifices the NAE would not have lasted 10 years, let alone 25.

The NAE conciously avoided taking sides in the ongoing power struggles, particularly those taking place outside the public view between those with something to gain or lose who where manipulating others for profit. Over the years the NAE developed writers and critics who have gone on to do well, brought new artists to the art world’s attention, and published the opinions and editorial content of many more Chicago artists and critics than any othe publication. The NAE went on to be influential on a national level as well.

The really sad part is not that the NAE fell into the wrong hands and died, but that judging by the comments I have read about Derek’s interview, the Chicago art scene is still as polarized as ever. Will we ever learn that art in Chicago is not black and white – you are either for me or against me – but comes in many shades of gray that we need to learn about, celebrate, share, and encourage? If we continue to behave like a bunch of provincial peasants, the world at large will never take our views or our art seriously. We could suffer a fate worse than making bad art, we could end up making art with the potential to be great that never gets noticed – let alone given serious consideration. Your best work could end up being meaningless because it is not seen, discussed, your arguments presented, then decried, defended, praised, or even noticed by history. Is that what we collectively want for Chicago art?

I for one do not. I want my fellow artists to support one another even if we at the same time try to convince each other that the path to the future is “A” or “B”. I myself may or may not ever paint a significant painting or write an important critique but I sure as hell want those who do to be seen and heard and discussed, then let history be the judge.

Tom

Personally I understand the need for pseudonyms – I use one myself -though it is a very public one-but when you have someone like ‘Steve’ coming on -saying fairly unspeakable things about my little girl….put yourself in my place Richard..would you tolerate it if it was you child? Or put another way, does a scumbag need a pseudonymn? Do you want to protect that form of sleazy anonymity?

Outside third party… you mean like what Matt Leblanc? – who is always pressing his petty little vendetta against me personally …….do you recall the gay asian San Francisco based performance artist -who name was used by an anonymous source to attack me some time back on your site? Now who but someone very involved with the scene in San Francisco would even know of that particular artist……..did you ever question LeBlanc about his involvement -I would if I were you -and while you are at it, with the rich history of bay area art -that I for one was deeply involved in for years -and then the LA scene -a context with which I am also very steeped in, why don’t you guys get someone really good -say, a Mark Pauline or a Roger Hermann or someone slightly less lightweight to anchor the west coast for you? Just an idea.

Do I enjoy the unending parade of Tim Porges types who without fail take the thread away from its content -into personal attacks on me -a person they don’t even know -my work -which as we saw on this thread Tim knew nothing of? Of course I don’t like it…..its annoying, stupid and unfortunate……am I in part to blame -of course, I have a volatile nature and an aggression to who I am that is I’m sure somewhat of a character flaw….so be it, no ones perfect. At the same time, when I come on this blog, its almost always, with a row to hoe and points to be made, with substance…something that cannot always be said when it comes to my detractors.

I say, ban the Steve’s that periodically show up -I believe everyones freedom of speech is worth our suffering each other even in egregious examples -like Tim Porges. We are all big boys and girls, tempers flare, the discussion heats up……it sure beats no discussion-

I just wanted to say that Art Monthly in London is closely aligned to the independent spirit of the NAE. But the mission of the NAE is specifically based in American pragmatism of Jane Adams the philosopher, as such this is very unique and valuable to Chicago.

maybe go hardcopy for features, reviews and responses and letters on web?

I realise that the blog is winding down now and the discussion is concerned with practical possibilities of restarting the NAE. However an issue has stuck in my mind, that of drawing parallels with the 18th and 19th century Academies and today’s art scene. Derek Guthrie in the interview said the Academies produced kitch. Tim Poges remarked that SAIC is a ‘forward thinking academy’ that is profesionalising art criticism’. In response I’ve been reading Thomas Crow’s, ‘Painters and Public Life’, it makes some very amusing reading. Crow discusses the ‘Split allegience to hierarchical culture and democratic reception’ that motivated the salon exhibitions. The Academy appointed it’s own art critic, the first professional modern art critic. He had limited independence and came under much ridicule. The academy painters found themselves in a situation in the salon where their paintings were judged not by their own aesthetic authority but by an amateur cafe culture that treated the salon like a theatre on opening night, where success was judged with either thumbs up or thumbs down. Here is an ironic account by the play-write, Loius de Carmontelle of the pluralist democratic reception of the salon public:

“The Salon opens and the crowd presses through the entrance: how its diversity and turbulence disturbs the spectator. This person moved by vanity, wants only to be the first to give his opinion; that one there, moved by boredom, searches only for a new spectacle. Here is one who treats pictures as simple items of commerce and concerns himself to estimate the prices they will fetch. Another hopes only that they will provide material for idle chat. The amateur examines them with a passionate but troubled eye. The painter’s eye is penetrating but jealous. The vulgarian’s is comical but stupid. The inferior class of people accustomed to adjusting it’s taste to those of its masters waits to hear a titled person before rendering its opinion and wherever one looks, countless young clerks, merchants and shop assistants in whom unchanging tedious labour has inevitably extinguish all feeling for beauty. Here nevertheless are the men whom every artist has endeavoured to please.”

In a similar fashion the blog has a mixture of seriousness and frivolity found in cafe culture.

I hang out around east end galleries in London with several critics and have discussed the issue of the academies in the pubs. The clearest parrallel we decided, was that of recent conceptualism where a once radical and highly politicised art form, such as that of Gustav Metzger for example, has become today a prescribed stylistic mimicry for many younger artists. In a similar fashion the grand history painting of the academies deteriorated into highly lucrative kitch versions of classical myths.We agreed that a ‘thin and weedy’conceptualism was a form most easily absorbed by a corporatised culture, including that of the art schools. In Chicago possibly programs like Culture in Action have provided a staged public airing of today’s academy art. What looks like a democratised approach is in reality part of a seamless corporate culture. Koons appears to be the epitome of today’s academy artist.

What’s your take on this? I understand Derek Guthrie will do a lecture tomorrow, perhaps this will come up as an issue? The NAE is a magazine that you might say was ignored by the SAIC academy but today is remembered and is re-emerging this also is reminiscent of a van guard position.

I’m not going to get into a discussion of specifics to appease you. None of the posts bother me personally, we were contacted by third parties who had problems with certain non-topic-relevant issues being discussed.

R

“A Kathryn”? I’m a noun now?

Ok, Jill, that’s it, I’ve had enough. When I become evil moderator of the world, you and all Jills, and any mention of people going up hills with Jack… gone, zip, done, off the comments. Like a BAS version of the old USSR KGB. Black cars pulling up in front of apartments. Zip.

Anyone who says they don’t like me, censored. Anyone who makes fun of my ultimate power status due to my puff segments at chicago public radio, gone. When I rule the world, all these minions will sweep my streets. I aim to be cruel, unfair, biased. In fact, I plan to post positive comments about my own posts under other people’s names just so it will look like I have support. Look for upcoming comments that say things like “Right on, Kathryn!”

If you want a straight answer:

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/27/boing-boings-moderat.html

Q. One of my comments has disappeared!

A. There are several possibilities. One is that we may be having technical problems. It never hurts to write and ask. Another possibility is that someone thought your comment would be better gone.

Q. I can’t believe that Boing Boing, of all places, would be using censorship. What happened to freedom of speech?

A. Boing Boing is steadfast in its support of your freedom of speech. We believe that you, O Reader, should be able to have (or refuse to have) anything you want on your own website, as long as it doesn’t deprive others of their rights. Yay, freedom of speech!

By that same token, freedom of speech also means that the people who write and edit Boing Boing have the right to have (or refuse to have) anything they want on their own website. If one of the things they don’t want is a comment that you have posted, they aren’t depriving you of your freedom of speech. You’re free to put that comment up on your own webpage.

Q. Why can’t you just tell everyone to ignore the trolls?

A. Because they can’t. Everyone automatically reads the text that’s there. If it’s nasty or unpleasant, they get a dose of that. If there’s too much of it, they stop participating. There’s far more internet discourse lost to trollage and casual rudeness than is ever lost to moderators.

Q. Isn’t the moderator just enforcing compliance with her own political views?

A. Not at all. You couldn’t reconstruct her personal views from a list of the times she’s intervened in a discussion. The time she invented disemvowelling, it was so she could deal with a flaming leftist.

The last damn thing BAS wants to do is start editing these forums. However the amount of personal attack, and old feuds that occasionally get aired here (particularly when utterly unrelated to the topic of the show) gets to be problematic.

Everyone at BAS has a day job or three, some have families, we barely get the show out, and it is more than a little frustrating to have to field LOTS of e-mails about people rising up with pitchforks and torches about what goes on in these forums. If everyone wants to attack each others ideas, awesome! I’m all for it, dialog is great. I do wish this forum was never used to resolve old conflicts, regardless of who started it, who is a factory wrapped douche, who people like and dislike.

My vote, although it is the minority vote in the relentless BAS email flurry I have had to endure in the last week or two has been to simply take down the discussion portion, which would be a loss, for me as well, but would solve the problem.

This is a plea to all who read this, fight all you want, check the personal shit at the door however. Call each other on the phone to resolve your differences. Maybe dueling should make a comeback! Although I doubt I live a week if it did.

Anyway. Thusfar we are not moderating, editing, or deleting anything. The only posts ever removed, to my knowledge, in the last three years, have been with the consent of the poster, and it was due to very personal reasons, and the poster respected the wishes of the person who asked to have the post removed.

Anyway, beat each other up to your hears content, but lets be adult about it all. I really don’t want to pull the plug, or start banning people. Also I am loathe to remove the anonymous post option and have everyone sign up, as the art world is a surprisingly small community and while it more often than not is done with ill intent, I do think people should be able to post without the fear of reprisal.

If we do change our policy we’ll let everyone know.

Be sure to vote in the poll.

R

As a working, professional artist -who makes his living as an artist, and is watching the impact of the internet unfold…..money well spent on a new level of robust support of analog on the ground sites/events would be the most effective way to initiate change.

However, I know what you mean — EDITORS and good ones like Ann Morgan, Janet Koplos, Betsy Baker, Derek, etc. are needed to keep quality of presentation high, not to censor content. That is necessary in order to have a clear profile.

If you DO start an NAE or the like, let me remind you though, that you need a far greater creativity in approaches than is usual. And freedom. I will help, but I like my full personal control at Sharkforum. If I want to do stuff that is strictly limited in scope I can write for Art in America or a million other top notch ones (who HAVE asked me). So creative freedom is required if you want more profi writers — we can go almost anywhere. So — think about things like what I have proposed unsuccessfully in the past to the NAE and others : dueling reviews, open opinion, intense editorials from oppositional camps, no consensus, — we have to learn from the possibilities of the web even in print.

I also think a consolidation of support is needed in some fashion between Proximity, NAE, SF, BaS, Bridge, etc, or you will simply overplow the same field.

Mark: you are one of those people who is able to keep his head while everyone around you are losing theirs. That is a valuable trait. But I have to remind you there are still gatekeepers and there probably always will be. That doesn’t mean a blog like discussion should be juried, but that the best sites, like the best publications, reserve part of themselves for stuff that has been selected. To increase quality of a site, gatekeeping is required. Pluarlism reminds us everything is potentially good, but it does not make it all good.

Jill: The NAE ran every letter, true. They could afford too because: 1), virtually all of the time no one wrote more than one letter; 2) few if any wrote a letter every month; and 3), most did not write letters at all. Blogs and other comment threads go on and on and on and on, as this one has. Further, the First Amendment does not give anyone the right to comment on someone else’s site, nor does it require that a publisher publish their material. It simply says the government won’t interfer with those who have the wherewithal and/or moxie to get something out in public.

Tim: Someone way above quoted from the NAE masthead and I always found that clear enough. However, I could boil it down to something a bit simpler, the NAE was FOR a wide discussion. They not only tolerated but they encouraged conflicting view-points. The early Artfourm (under John Coplans – another Brit) did somewhat the same thing, but as it “matured” it became more and more narrow in its ways. Later on Arts, under Richard Martin, also took the route of widely differeing view-points. Like the NAE it ran into financial problems and tried to remake itself (also like the NAE) along the lines of the more successful, more narrow publications, and ultimately folded.

Myself: It may be that financial life being what it is, something as cheap as the web may be the only medium that can support a publication that encourages wide variance in view-point. The NAE may be the best banner to run such an enterprise, because its reputation was so solid in favor of multiple views. Ideally, it would not be explicitly Chicago-centric, whatever form it might take. A printed publication would have more influence, though.

Welcome to my life people -where the likes of Tim Porges are a dime a dozen. Like I said earlier, making enemies faster than I can kill ‘em

I have been slimed pretty thoroughly here in response to not much. I’ve been trying to keep it civil for whatever reason. Just going elsewhere would have been smarter.

Fern, I agree that at least a start web-wise is good — but most of all a kind of cross-over, for serendipity, among Proximity, SF, BaS and so should be aimed at, and perhaps tied in to any NAE that could occur.