Allright so my computer is fairly f-ed and therefore this show note will be even less witty than usual. A bunch of post-its are wedged between the keyboard and the video processor to hold it in place. Curse you IBM.
Duncan and Marc LeBlanc talk to Caleb Lyons of Old Gold Gallery and formerly of Art Ledge.
Duncan talks to artist Lisa Boumstein-Smalley about her new show at the Alfedena Gallery.
Brian Andrews and Marc LeBlanc talk to Justin Hansch about Justinâ€™s Museum of Contemporary Art. We collectively apologize for the crappy sound quality on this one but we are working to correct the problem.
Sarah corrects BAS on their grammar.
This Week: Guest interviewer Lisa Dorin talks to German artist Jana Gunstheimer (see the blurb shamelessly lifted from the AIC website, below). ALSO we get two different perspectives on the fight over the Public Art Program and how they handle the selection and approval process. Kathryn talks to Olga Stefan Executive Director of the Chicago Artists’ Coalition at Monday’s protest rally, and
Richard spent a lot of time chuckling to himself about the music cues in this weeks show.
German artist Jana Gunstheimer combines her academic training in ethnology with a refined figurative drawing practice to observe and comment on aspects of her own culture. Gunstheimer responds to the transformations she sees taking place in contemporary German society including postindustrial desolation, drastic unemployment, and rising levels of aggression among people of her generation by way of a semi-fictional organization she calls Nova Porta. Complete with a logo, Web site, and an actual membership, the organization offers People without Social Function a semblance of structure through group cohesion and rigid hierarchy.
Adopting impenetrable rituals, tireless evaluation procedures, and managed leisure, the organization’s stated goal is risk management and its activities are driven, if not wholly fabricated, by the artist. Under the conceptual framework of Nova Porta, Gunstheimer effectively parodies hierarchical structures, bureaucracy, and, most importantly, society’s need to define oneÃ¢ï¿½ï¿½s worth in terms of work.
Focus: Jana Gunstheimer is the artist’s first solo museum exhibition in the
There’s a sad sort of clanging from the clock in the hall
And the bells in the steeple too.
And up in the nursery an ubsurd little bird
Is popping out to say cook-coo cook-coo, cook-coo
Regretfully they tell us cook-coo
But firmly they compell us cook-coo
To say goodbye cook-coo…
So long farewell, auf weidersehen good-bye
Update it has been confirmed that Edward Lifson has left Hello Beautiful as can be read here
Nothing is absolutely sure right now but WBEZ has redesigned it’s website and in the process there is no mention of Edward Lifson. Try to find his name anywhere and you come up with nothing. As you can see in these two photos of the website before and after it has gone from “Edward Lifson brings you in monotone polyphonic sound! Edward Lifson’s Hello Beautiful!” to “Hello Beautiful………….chirp…….chirp”. The Edward Lifson blog is not referenced and according to Alison Cuddy on this weeks show Edward Lifson is “out furthering his education on the arts”.
If it was a vacation they would have said vacation this isn’t Pro Wrestling where you have to have a fake injury to keep the “plot” moving while you bask in the Jamaican sun for a few weeks. Is he out like Kane walking the earth learning about art from the people that cross his path (and solving crimes on the side?) or is it more likely that with the new look comes some changes for WBEZ only time will tell. Until it does and we can in fact say goodbye to Hello Beautiful, it’s 1980 tone music opening and it’s monotone euphoria of this weeks “Hello Fellow!” we will count the seconds till it is over just as we do when we actually listen to the show.
This week Michelle Grabner and Duncan interview Gaylen Gerber.
“Gaylen Gerber’s work often incorporates the artwork of other artists in its realization. Gerber asks other artists to cooperate with him and let their work be installed against the ground he provides. In doing so he focuses our attention on a central aspect of perception, which is that to perceive something at all you must first be able to perceive it as distinct from its context or background. By positioning his work as the contextual ground against which we see another work of art, Gerber draws attention to the permeability of the distinctions between object and context and fundamentally questions the stability of perception itself. Gaylen Gerber has exhibited widely including recent exhibitions and cooperative projects at the Musee d’Art Moderne Grand-Duc Jean in Luxembourg, Luxembourg; FRAC-Bourgogne and Musee des Beaux-Arts, Dijon, France; Kunsthalle Bern, Bern, Switzerland; and The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Exhibition view of Gaylen Gerber’s 2006 Mudam exhibition featuring Gerber’s work with Kay Rosen, Sam Salisbury and Remy Zaugg. Zaugg’s text roughly translates: and if, as soon as I act, I was not being anymore. Photo: Jean-Noel Lafargue.”
The closing song goes out to Duncan.
The City Council is on the verge of passing an ordinance that is bad for Chicago, bad for its citizens and particularly bad for the art community.
We have proposed an alternative ordinance that will not be considered unless you act. We are the following groups: Bad at Sports, the Chicago Artists Coalition, Lumpen, Sharkforum, ArtLetter and others to be named soon.
Mayor Daley and the Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) have proposed a terrible ordinance to modify the Public Art Program. The stated reason makes no sense: that the meetings were open to the public was cumbersome and unnecessary in their judgment. That the previous ordinance existed for 25 years and that the City has an exemplary art collection they deemed irrelevant.
It “privatizesâ€ the the selection of public art by eliminating all Open Meetings.
It means the DCA does not have to post thorough information on their website about upcoming commissions.
It will remove transparency and accessibility from the Public Art program and art commissions.
It eliminates voting, democracy and public recourse.
Unless the art community acts the City Council will approve their proposed ordinanceon the 13th of June. The best way to prevent this from happening is for artists to
stage a large rally at 5:30 PM Monday, June 11th at the Picasso Sculpture
and a letter writing campaign to make the Mayor and the Aldermen aware of what Chicago artists think and want.
Visualize 100â€™s of Chicago artists rallying around a single cause – Artistsâ€™ Rights.
Have you ever read about a large group of artists speaking out publicly with one voice?
Think about the media coverage.
To a large extent the events of the next ten days stand to significantly affect the future of Chicago artists (and Chicago galleries that care about their
Hereâ€™s the deal:
In mid-May at the request of the Commissioner of Cultural Affairs (Lois Weisberg), Mayor Daley proposed an ordinance to revamp the Public Art Program.
This proposed ordinance is bad government, bad for Chicagoans and particularly bad for the Chicago art community and artists.
Shortly after the ordinance sailed through committee (despite us â€œwinningâ€ the discussion) a few of us succeeded in having the measure postponed by the City
WELL, the issue is coming back up for a City Council vote on June 13th. Weâ€™ve spoken to a number of aldermen. Most aldermen think: If the artists donâ€™t care, we donâ€™t care.
It is possible to change the system and it is not going to be easy.
It is time to step up or get stepped on.
As an artist or a member of the art community in Chicago, or elsewhere, if you ever want to able to apply for a commission, or give a damn about your peers
being able to, now is the time to act:
Appear at a RALLY FOR ARTISTSâ€™ RIGHTS on the Monday the 11th at 5:30 at the Picasso
â€“ 2 days before the City Council meets to vote on the 13th.
Write letters to the Tribune & Sun Times editorial page.
Write a letter to the Mayor
Write a letter to your alderman. Speak to your alderman.
Speak in favor of Our New (alternative) Ordinance supporting Artistâ€™s Rights
Send an email to me or a member of our team telling us what you think. Weâ€™ll count them, print them and share them where theyâ€™ll hopefully make a difference.
Under the pretense of streamlining the selection process, the DCAâ€™s proposed ordinance means the DCA does not have to have â€œopen meetingsâ€ to give or get any information to artists about upcoming commissions, nor answer to anyone about selected commissions.
They do not have to put information on their website anymore (theyâ€™ve been doing a horrible job putting out information so far.)
They do not have to allow artists to apply for specific projects.
They do not have to respond to the community.
They do not have to be responsible for their actions.
They do get to keep their inbred selection process whereby they dip into their archaic database, pick whoever they want, sometimes repeatedly, and not have to tell artists why or how they chose or choose.
If you are going to write a letter, here are some key points.
No fair, honest or open consideration of Chicago artists
No Open Meetings.
No useful listings of commission possibilities
No applying for a specific commission
No knowing why you werenâ€™t considered
Under their proposed new ordinance, the finger-pointing will shift from the DCA to the aldermen because alderman will be asked to have ward forums to discuss art commissions in their ward. This will be an added logistical and financial responsibility for the alderman they may not want. The aldermen will be responsible to post notice of the forums (many donâ€™t have web sites). They will have to pay for postage out of their own pockets. They will have to host and attend art meetings in their wards. They will have to put up with the potential for dividing their community over art issues. These selfish reasons may be sufficient reason aldermen will defeat this ordinance June 13th â€“ if they are informed.
If the aldermen think you care, you will be heard.
If the aldermen donâ€™t think you care they will automatically vote with the Mayor and pass this ordinance assuring a closed doors, patronage system where those who are favored will get the most commissions. It will not be based on quality, or a competent committee considering your work. Instead of a democracy weâ€™ll have the Department of Cultural Affairs acting like a country club, picking who they want, why they want, without opening up the selection process and broadening the amount of art they can consider.
The artists suffer. The City suffers. The community suffers. The DCA gets a free ride.
Think about Chicagoâ€™s reputation in the rest of the country.
We are already being discussed by National Public Art Administrators
We will be a topic of discussion at the National Public Art Conference in Las Vegas.
Is this going to look good for Chicago in the rest of the country?
How about internationally?
How about the Olympics?
Every Olympics has a large Cultural Olympics held concurrently.
Do you think the Olympic Committee is going to be favorably impressed with this ordinance?
You and the Olympics
Hidden in the bowels of their ordinance is a distinction between Percent for Art and Public Art. The DCA has succeeded in keeping this totally vague. All Percent for Art (a specific term) is part of Public Art (a general term). Only the Percent for Art must have public forums.(Percent for Art applies to money spent in City government buildings and land. But Public Art also includes money for art not for city property yet still administered by DCA â€“ like housing to be constructed for Olympic athletes â€“ which could be billions of dollars.) Can you say cronyism?
Well get this: According to their proposed ordinance they only have to have forums (namby-pamby discussions with not binding authority and no vote) with Percent for Art. Okay, but for Public Art they donâ€™t even have to have any forums at all.
Who do you think they are trying to take care of?
Actions speak louder than words.
you understand why the Mayor doesnâ€™t care about you â€“ the Chicago artist? Or why the Alderman donâ€™t, or the rest of the world for that matter? Because you havenâ€™t made yourself seen and you havenâ€™t made yourself heard enough.
It is time again to assume responsibility for your career, to take a stance.
Can you visualize the impact just 500 artists showing up at a rally could have globally?
Do you realize the publicity Chicago artists can get?
Do you grasp the impact the discussion of this ordinance will have?
You can either shape your future constructively or get screwed.
It is up to you.