This week, guest host James Yood and Duncan interview Derek Guthrie, co-founder of the New Art Examiner for an illuminating history lesson.
New Art Examiner was a Chicago-based art magazine. Founded in October 1973 by Derek Guthrie and Jane Addams Allen, its final issue was dated May-June 2002.
At the time of the New Art Examiner ‘s launch, in October 1973, Chicago was “an art backwater.” Artists who wished to be taken seriously left Chicago for New York City, and apart from a few local phenomena, such as the Hairy Who, little attention was given to Chicago art and artists.
Called in Art in America “a stalwart of the Chicago scene,” the New Art Examiner was conceived to counter this bias and was almost the only art magazine to give any attention to Chicago and midwestern artists (Dialogue magazine, which covered midwestern art exclusively, was founded in Detroit in 1978, but it has also ceased publication). Editor Jane Allen, an art historian who studied under Harold Rosenberg at the University of Chicago, was influential in developing new writers who later became significant on the New York scene and encouraged a writing style that was lively, personal, and honestly critical.
Over the next three decades Chicago’s art scene flourished, with new museums, more art dealers, and increased art festivals, galleries, and alternative spaces. Critics asserted that the New Art Examiner “ignored, opposed or belittled” Chicago’s artistic developments, that it was overly politicized, overloaded with jargon, and did not serve the Chicago or midwest arts communities.
The critics and artists who wrote for the New Art Examiner, included Fred Camper, Jan Estep, Ann Wiens, Adam Green (cartoonist), Robert Storr, Carol Diehl, Jerry Saltz, Eleanor Heartney, Carol Squiers, Janet Koplos and Mark Staff Brandl.
New Art Examiner
Derek Guthrie
James Yood
Artforum
Art Institute of Chicago
Jane Addams Allen
Betsy Baker
University of Chicago
Joshua Taylor
Art News
Blackstone Rangers
Martyl Langsdorf
Museum of Contemporary Art
Ed Paschke
Franz Schulze
Art in America
Lake Forest College
Jack Burnham
Guggenheim
Defilement: A Story of the Art World
Proximity magazine Ed Marszewski
James Wood
Getty
Illinois Art Council
Michael Bonesteel
Moholy-Nagy
Mapplethorpe
Smithsonian Fellowship
Dennis Adrian
Alan Artner
Van Gogh
Gauguin
Jesse Helms
Kathryn Hixson
Eleanor Hartney
Alice Thorson
Robert Storr
Peter Schjeldahl
Joseph Beuys
- Episode 886: Scott Speh on 20 Years of Western Exhibitions & Chicago Art Scene Reflections - November 29, 2024
- Episode 885: Betsy Odom - November 26, 2024
- Episode 884: Pete and Jake Fagundo - November 12, 2024
you’ve come around. that’s a start.
Now, work on those edges.
keep it up -edges? what a joke -you’ll find and edge -suddenly.
no no no. edges Wesley. ya know, hard, firm, soft and lost. just trying to help.
Help yourself sound stupid? -I get that. For the sake of argument, the ‘edges’ in my work are extremely complex and varied employing any number of techniques softness of focus, hardness of edge etc…..but since you are such a hotshot painter, lets have full names; lets see the work of the critic…..no? Run out of courage or didn’t have any to begin with? Will then if you don’t have the huevos for that, why not be specific with your complaint; ie name the painting and your problems with the edges in that particular painting- given that gross generalization is modus operandi of the dull mind and I’m sure you wouldn’t want that…..
again, you’re being defensive. it’s ok. just keep drawing, you’ll figure it out.
just keep drawing, you’ll figure it out……..run out of ideas already ‘Steve’? Or maybe you just didnt know what you were talking about to begin with.
I sure there are plenty of problems in my work, in fact I know it! Like de Kooning said when someone noted one of his followers could paint his best work as well as he could , “but can he make the bad ones?” That is the argument and the opportunity, where they lie. The ‘edges’ ( so stupid) are not one of those problems in the work of a highly problematic painter- as anyone with half a brain that had ever looked at my work would know. Take the stupidity elsewhere, you clearly dont know enough about painting to discuss it- I’m done.
“a highly problematic painter”
well said. i need to sleep now. Continue with your struggles. i wish you the best.
“a highly problematic painter†as are all painters who are worth a shit. Its what makes them who they are.
-I’m sure you do need to get to sleep -this is after all about the time you have always signed off on your little sunday night email/blog forays…..
The devil is in the details-
“But in publishing, there’s not revolution in leadership, there’s many strong arms. Marc Smith has 250 people on their feet, going crazy at the Green Mill for POETRY. I mean, whoda thought? Who’s cheering and throwing beer bottles over abstract expressionism in this town? *
Yet more revelations coming at us fast and furious… -first we are ‘all pro’ when we are beginning to write for Time Out and now we are going to insult the many serious poets in this town by bringing up poetry slams as what is happen here in terms of poetry. Really. Kathryn, do you even have a clue how serious poets regard poetry slams? -Here I will give you a hint -its kind of like how painters view the guy on stage with a cover band doing Purple Haze while he executes a portrait of Jimi Hendrix with spray paint under a blacklite, within the time parameters of the song -on black velvet.
For those interested in the poetry scene here in Chicago -sharkforum with our poet in residence Dr.Simone Muench is an excellent source. Simone -whose last book Lamp Black And Ashes was a book of the week pick in the New York Times -where it was hugely reviewed is perhaps the top under 40 poet in Illinois. On NPR she was the peoples choice for poet laureat of the state in recent years- Each week she offers up a new book of poetry that she finds compelling -many of which come from our community.
Also on sharkforum is Kenneth Clarke -long time brilliant director (now moved on) of The Poetry Center here Ken introduced an amazing program here -first realizing that perhaps the most highly regarded poet in America if not the world -Mark Strand was living and teaching right here in Chicago -in fact winning both a Pulitzer and the Wallace Stevens Award while here -along with being poet laureat of the US…..of course no one in Chicago had thought to have Mark read until Ken came along and put him on the stage at Metro. Ken also started a broadsides program -pairing local visual artists with poets to creat limited edtion prints. Paschke, Tony Fitzpatrick, Vera Klement and myself were all involved with this program -where Ken also reached out to the music community -Lucinda Williams and her father Miller Williams came and read and played here and then retired over to The Sharkpit where a gathering of all disciplines watched theatre by The Hypocrites and revelled late into the night. Billy Corgan, Tortise…any number of musical configurations here were involved with this interdisciplinary program….slightly more interesting than flying beer bottles at the Green Mill-
Of course Kathryn then breaks her word (boy that was quick!) with her ab-ex reference….let the record show, that in a community that had finally wised up to the foolishness not to mention flat out inaccuracy of throwing that tired, stale tomato at me, Kathryn was the last to get a clue.
In the future I am going to leave you alone Kathryn to your own devices and spend my time and energy on sharkforum which is not anywhere near as egalitarian as BAS (thank god!) -but I will say and admit….your idea of what criteria it takes to be an art world ‘pro’ and your subsequent conversation shook me…..I honestly feel like you have just made CAC look smart -and thats no mean feat! Nor small accomplishment -I’m sure something is in order to note the moment-
What’s getting lost is that “Professional” and “amateur” are very specific, technical terms.
A professional is paid for their work, an amateur is not. My father was a filmmaker and he instilled that key difference for me. When I say that I’ve gone pro, I’m simply saying I enjoy gettig paid for my work. It’s not a lot of money, but it’s something.
For five years, here and on Othergroup, I’ve always had the personal desire for art to be for everyone. My wish is that art and poetry reach the widest possible audience. I’m not saying that’s the only way to look at it, but I’m saying it’s mine, and it’s a long-held belief.
The poetry slam is not high poetry, but it brings people into the fold who didn’t know that liking poetry was possible. I’m always excited about venues that are approachable and bring in newcomers.
That’s not everyone’s bag, but it’s mine.
Shark, you know you’re not going to leave the BAS comments section. I used to waitress and people were always storming out, saying they would never eat here again. Two weeks later they were back wanting a ham sandwich.
And at the end of the day, Christ, Wesley, let’s just let it go. You don’t give one shit what I think, and vice versa. I’ll ignore your brilliance and you can ingore my ignorance.
Are you happy now?
Also- I’ve got to sign off for the week. I have a book deal in the works and have to focus on that. So go attack that sentence, get started on that, and I promise, promise, I’ll say nothing in return.
Again, it’s all about making you happy at this point, and making the comments section of our little podcast, the very center of the art universe, work for you.
K
he’s got a point. sharkforum is kinda awesome.
there is barely no content on sharkforum and it is rarely updated. what’s so kinda awesome about it?
actually you have a something of a fair point -there is plenty of content on sharkforum -but it has not been updated as it should be -and that has been my fault as I have been preoccupied with raising my little girl and trying to maintain a rigorous painting schedual-
which is also why I havent been here on BAS either -and is why in the future I am going to focus on sharkforum rather than the thankless task of blogging here, as sharkforum is a place where ideas can be put out there and unpacked without all of the dummies, noise/cyberstalkers etc
In fairness, to MSB, he has continually added content to the site as has Simone Muench -myself, Lynne Warren and others have been remiss in our activity there -this will be remedied in the near future.
In our switch over to the new moveable Type system at Sharkforum.org and to our new site design, comments kept getting eaten! I think that discouraged a lot of people, thinking that they were being edited out or something. I know ’cause I get lots of emails directly as comments on posts. If you’d like to comment on SF, please do so again. We have that corrected now and I’ll argue with you. Also my dissertation, as a “performative” on-line version, which will end in a book and an exhibition/installation has just begun there, so I’d love to have your input, oh BaS listeners!
I’m a child.
Kathryn November 24: “What’s getting lost is that “Professional†and “amateur†are very specific, technical terms.
A professional is paid for their work, an amateur is not. My father was a filmmaker and he instilled that key difference for me. When I say that I’ve gone pro, I’m simply saying I enjoy gettig paid for my work. It’s not a lot of money, but it’s something.”
Kathryn November 21: “90% of the discussion is fine. But I just don’t see the need to act like complete amateurs. […] My world view is that you either go pro or remain a hack.”
I think this may be a personal best for Bad At Sports’ comments section. Is it? 171 comments?
I’d like to suggest, if I may, that I think this simply demonstrates how important the New Art Examiner was, and how important its spirit continues to be. I think what it did, in providing a space of real integrity for discussion, was that it allowed Chicago and its art culture to “punch above its weight” with the rest of the art critical profession. In my humble opinion, nothing done in publishing since NAE has managed to approach this standard, and I think we’re worse off for its loss. I think it’s important we start by remembering what that discussion meant.
which is why Michael Workman I am holding you to your promise to become a member of The Sharkpack and begin voicing your thoughts on sharkforum -in any way you feel is appropriate.
Sharkforum is both total anarchy, and, a benevolent dictatorship with The Shark as Supreme Dictator For Life.
Wesley, let me count the ways. I too am remiss, and will correct this unfortunate oversight when next I come up for air. It better be soon, I don’t have gills as such just yet.
Just when you think you’re out, they drag you back in, so I guess I need to respond to all these punches.
I’m not sure why you feel, Wesley, that you need to be a bully to express your opinions. You beat most people into submission not through the strength of your arguments, but through your constant belittling. So, go ahead and swear a little more at me.
Anyway, the CAC is a service organization – we exist to help artists. 2300 are members. If you don’t find any value in our services, then the CAC is not for you. Saying that the CAC is awful, or whatever Wesley said, is absurd. Your argument has been that the artists that are members are not good, and that it’s a club. Obviously you haven’t really been keeping up, but it doesn’t matter. It’s just not for you. I don’t have the need anymore to convince you of the reasons for our existence.
The reason we started an art journal (we started planning one year ago) was exactly for the reason that we are all discussing – the lack of real analysis and criticism. Proximity was probably being planned concurrently to Prompt, and coincidentally our names both start with PRO (someone pointed that out in an early post). There was no communication between Edmar and me – it just happened. We both responded to what we saw as a dearth in venues for real analysis. He responded with proximity, and we with Prompt.
If the two had both been read, really, it would have been obvious what differentiates us. Prompt is really trying to contextualize the visual arts in a much broader societal context, with contributions from writers that are not only cross-disciplinary in their practice, but also are experts in other fields, from anthropology, law, religion, science, architecture, etc. We want to understand how the visual arts impact the rest of our world, not only analyze the success of the work. In upcoming issues, we will have an economist, and other writers, contribute articles that really question received wisdom. Kathryn mentioned this earlier – one’s politics is evident from what he/she does not question. At Prompt, we want to question everything, and try to offer all intelligent and well documented information that offers the most 3-dimensional analysis possible.
Yes, we both have invited certain “usual suspects” to contribute, and that too I think is a coincidence. It just happens that some are well-respected and we find their work compelling. Our intent is to continue making sure that Prompt is entirely cross-disciplinary and offer diverse opinions and perspectives on the relationship between art and the rest of our culture.
And I do agree that it will be our continual challenge to differentiate between publications.
As for Paul’s questioning: I’m not sure what you’re getting at bringing up that old article. Yes, I hired my husband to do the CAC website because I knew that he would charge me less than 1/3 of what that thing would have cost. Deanna, as you know, loves to bring up “controversial” stuff. That really was not that controversial. We all do what we can to save the organization for which we work money. CAR visual arts cost more than $200,000 and has more or less the same features (obviously with a completely different design and purpose).
Also, regarding the local nature of Prompt and my affiliation with it: Prompt is not only local. We look at how local practices have a global impact. Our goal is to bring Chicago into dialogue with the rest of the world. We will be getting submission from writers who understand the local and global contexts and are able to create parallels.
I agree with Michael that the New Art Examiner was a major contributor to the art scene in Chicago. When I was working at the Examiner selling Ads and we did not review galleries by the amount of money they spent. I worked with Anne Morgan, editor and that was a very clear policy. The examiner was exciting and controversial, it was talked about, pro and con, it provided a forum that is not happening today. When we went to work for the NAE we did it out of passion and love for what we were doing and money was really never the issue, we knew that this was not a corporation with big salaries. When we wrote reviews or articles it was not for the money. I am surprised how much anger there is by unpaid writers, I do believe they should be paid but they had a choice. I chose to be an artist and I work to support my habit I do not believe that the value of ones art is not related to the money it brings in. That is bullshit. A perfect example for me is Diamen Hurst.
The NAE/Derek Guthrie has the gift that touches many of us and that is to think and respond to the ideas presented. It touches our passion for something we love and are willing to fight for.
Olga, the strength of my arguments stand on their own, if it all sails over your head as it clearly does, its not my problem.
As the ex-president of your board Dr Jerry Hausman is a long time friend of mine -and btw is someone who I warned against taking the postion-which was way beneath him in terms of his accomplishments, and which I get the idea he now wishes he had heeded,- I understand that though you have stepped aside as president -Queen -whatever you call yourself/ your title was and is at CAC, you still run it as your little fifedom, to serve you…..not that it matters, a cursory look at the artists involved with CAC only serves to remind that whether it be Prompt, CAC -whatever the name, you can’t make a horse out of horseshit.
Its the dregs, you are its mouthpiece.
You would be better served not to listen to rumors and repeat everything you hear. Jerry was never the president since I came to the CAC – I never knew him as such. He left the organization because he was the only one to not agree with the CAC undertaking the publishing of Prompt. So keep hurling those “truths”, and keep repeating others’ impressions of me. Obviously you have no direct contact, or ability to really judge me since we don’t know each other (again, 2300 are members, so basically according to you they are all awful – including some of the more important Chicago artists that don’t share your anger against me). If Jerry doesn’t appreciate me, obviously you have to hate me and publicly denounce me, right? You’ve hit your all time best!
woooooo!…..blood in the water, chunks of seal flesh bobbing.
what an insufferable asshole you are kimler.
it’s ironic however that the one thing that is more garish and insulting than yourself are your own sloppy, ghoulish paintings.
you’re your own worst joke. go away.
Thank you, Fern. Until we see that kind of autonomy to speak clearly again, without the blind spots of an interpolating cultural ideology, Chicago will continue its current slide to an art world backwater. And artists will continue to be stuck as just so much damn cannon fodder, flailing around without any realizable direction on comment boards like this one.
Well Michael -I aggreed with Fern -to a point -art accrues legitimate value -but the prices being paid for Kilimnicks, Currins, Doigs…….are obscene. Thats why a serious art world here with decent prices and serious collectors -with intelligent and strategic (canon creating) curatorial support….could seriously alter the art world -which is in need of change as everything else.
On to a less pleasant but very serious topic.- Steve aka andrewloughnane.com -go check this clown out -he has taken off the CINCICenterForARTS reference -where he was a clerk -(when first looking at his site when it was up you were left with the impression he must have had a retrospective there! People should go to this site, and take a look at his photo so you will know who he is. This guy had his emails blocked and put in a holding bin for possible legal use due to his stalking a reporter at Time Out. He has come on BAS and made obscene remarks about my two and a half year old daughter. He showed up at Tony Fitz’s Cultural Center Opening and tried to create problems first with me, then -this is a laugh, with Tony. He has been told by his boss at the Art Institute where he schlepps paintings (which btw he is completely untrained and knows nothing about-) that if he keeps harassing artists -stalking people he is going to be fired. One of his favorite things is sending emails discussing his members size -apparently there must be a problem in that department. I have saved several of these gems for possible use by the police-
We can all hate each other here and fight -but this is a different more serious situation -this guy is a creep -heads up.
Relax kimler You’re simply an arrogant, delusional blowhard.
I’m tired of reading your annoying repetitive drivel here (I’ll bet I’m not alone). Go back to your pathetic ezine and rant away there. Quite simply, the only reason I chimed in to begin with was Klein’s comment about your work. Sorry, it made me physically ill.
……………”leave the poor guy alone?’………sure Andrew –
Calm down little fish.
Perhaps that birdhouse/garage you live in is starting to get to you.
Sorry Richard, I’ll leave the delusional narcissist alone for now.
“birdhouse/garage…..another dead give away…….just forget the phrases you come up with and then repeat? Pull yourself together dirtbag. Look wannabe -you are so cool and so tough, if you are not who I claim you are -put your name here……won’t ever be nervy enough to do that will you coward? Such a man!
Jeez Us Kreist “Steve,” you are being as big an asshole as possible and baiting Wesley.
Just ignore it, Wesley. This whole thing with “Steve” has happened repeatedly. Just refuse to answer. Let this thing get back to Derek and the NAE, or else just end here. The next podcast is up with Winkelman, and has some very interesting perceptions that would intrigue you WK, so fuck this weird spit fight guy and go on to other stuff. I know it is hard to stop when being personally (and rather idiotically) attacked, but now it has all gotten too far away from Derek’s really concrete compaints about Chicago.
You are right Mark, of course; -its a little hard to ignore this idiot ‘Steve’-when this is the guy who was making lewd comments about my daughter on this very site several months ago- as you note, repeatedly, but still lets move on -I believe I’ve shined the light on the cockroach.
I think we worked at the NAE the same time, or overlapped, Fern, right? I hope you are doing well. I’d like this discussion to end with her fine statement above:
“The NAE/Derek Guthrie has the gift that touches many of us and that is to think and respond to the ideas presented. It touches our passion for something we love and are willing to fight for.”
Well Mark -I cannot let you have the last word here -despite the drag that it is being me at times with the ensuing controversy, the krill, the crapola….we did get somewhere, what Fern had to say did have merit -and Derek’s original vision for NAE did as well….while this has all been going on I have reached out to several people in the art world here to start contributing to sharkforum -Vincent Dermody and Michael Workman- I am sure other names are to follow-…lets begin an attempt to create a contemporary version of NAE with BAS, SHARKFORUM and others, -let a thousand flowers bloom.
If I have been harsh on organizations, individuals CAC /both Kathryns -its not personal -with a shark it never is….its about disposing of what is not essential, keeping the environment clean and doing away with old constructs that never worked and only stand in the way now.
Dear Chicago,
Derek asked me to contribute to the blog by discussing my experiences as a student at SAIC at around the time New Art Examiner moved to Washington. My experiences quietly echo many of the issues Derek talks of. We were young and dumb and easy to beat up. Some of it was banal, but rather than have you all glaze over as I rant, here’s one event that I particularly value. Ed Kienholz came to my studio in the Glasshack at SAIC, had a chat and bought some sculpture. I didn’t think much of this at the time, other than he was a fascinating person and I needed the cash. I since realise that I received quite an important education in that 15-minute meeting. Having written criticism myself I’m now more capable of defining things. It means that the work was underwritten not by a curator, nor an administrator, educator, not by arts council criteria, university research criteria, nor even an art critic but by a highly significant artistic sensibility. The focus on sensibility positioned my work outside of any of the motives and ambitions of those controlling the art scene and sealed my exit from Chicago.
In the Bad at Sports interview with Derek I’d like to comment on his use of the word de-professionalism in relation to the current state of the art world. This sounds straight-forward and direct but I think it needs unpacking a bit further. I assume Derek, you are positioning your’s and Jane’s publishing as a professional endeavour against the anti-intellectualism of Imagism in Chicago. Dialogue between the role of the amateur and that of the professional has been and remains a key avant guard strategy. I’m sure the portrait of Dr. Gachet by ‘the loser’, Van Gogh would have been considered amateurish by many. Manet was also considered laughably amateurish in his use of large areas of flat paint. My point is that it was the interplay between the codes of the pseud technical professionalism of the Academy with the codes of amateurish art that made the work critically important.
Furthermore I am also troubled by DG’s notion that there is no trickle up in the art world, again this sounds convincing and authoritative in as much as we have all been indoctrinated by the language of Mrs. Thatcher’s economic policy, these terms have resonance in our ears like a second nature. Are we to assume then, that the position of the professional critic is close to that of the petty bourgeois shop-keeper? Where the critic in his corner-store gets to refuse some people who come hoping for credit. This cultural position tends to keep in place both the proletariat, looking for credit and the silver spoon culture it seeks to preserve. Trickle up does occur when an artist writes criticism and defines his own position. St. Ive’s modernism is a good model in this respect and more recently Art and Language have achieved this. I think that art students need to understand and define the complexity of notions of the professional and the amateur as a critical dynamic.
Criticism is, historically, a profession without professionals. Having professionalized art and thus made it better than ever before, forward-thinking academies like SAIC are now professionalizing criticism.
I am not bitter about this. I welcome it. As Wesley says, let a thousand flowers bloom. The schools that hand out degrees in criticism will be forced to publish the work of the critics they produce, and it will be better than nothing. The various university galleries have now taken the place once held by the alternative spaces, and university critics and journals will take the place once filled by the alternative arts press — by the NAE. That’s already a done deal.
As far as literary and social criticism go, that’s how things have been for decades. You have your NYRB and Bookforum and whatnot, but they’re supported by a foundation of subvened academic journals. The same will go for art criticism, and that’s where your renaissance of criticism will come from; whether you think that’s trickle up or trickle down is beside the point.
The future of the Gulfstream/MiamiBasel art world will be determined by forces outside it, as is only fair: by what Obama, Brown and the other heads of state decide to do about the speculative derivatives that have done for our economy what five years of unlimited coke and steroids would do for professional sports.
It’s hard to tell art students right now what they need to understand, given how catastrophically the professional worlds to which they might hope to belong stand to change, and soon.
I would tell them that as Diogenes says, in the house of the rich man there is no place to spit but in his face. If you choose to swallow instead, you have to understand that as both an ethical and a career decision. Diogenes would never have made it through a Chicago winter.
A final bit of quotation, from Kerrigan’s “The world of Pio Baroja” — “Lacking imagination, Aviraneta was forced to live the life of a fictional character amid the irritation of daily living, dependent always on the chance opportunity to act as he pleased, crossing paths and words with aggressive competitors who filled precisely the space he craved to fill.” That, dear art and criticism students, has been my life, and it will be yours, professional or not. Enjoy.
Tim, this is a really good post. There is a bunch of good stuff in it.
I do think they only know how to swallow which oddly enough to a shark, is offensive -and from where much my anger derives -its a paradox.
Great posts Stephen, Shark and Tim.
Mark, I think we did work together at the NAE and I ran into to you a various openings at that time if you would like you can email me [email protected].
I think that chicago could possibly take a leadership role in the arts at this time. We sent a man to the white house and may have the Oplymic games here. We are in the spotlight right now and a publication about art and critism might take off.
“I think that chicago could possibly take a leadership role in the arts at this time. We sent a man to the white house and may have the Oplymic games here. We are in the spotlight right now and a publication about art and critism might take off.”
i don’t understand the goal. to be successful? to steer art making? to steer art buying? to steer art conversation? to feel confident at dinner next to new york art folk? to get invited?
Jill, to signal the end of the hegemony of one-line gimmickry, art known as ‘festivalism’. ‘neo conceptualism -etc and begin to introduce more serious methodologies than the simple goal of impressing your dept head who then might manuever you in an exhibition. At the ‘right’ place with the ‘right’ people.
To embrace methodologies of expermentalists-long careers in the arts where people GET BETTER -the idea of OLD MASTERS…..
To consider art that isn’t about bling at Art Basil Miami -but rather is art that strives to address the human condition- art that stands against, is the enemy of the people in the sense of what is cathartic-
To recover some of the bohemian intellectualism that informed art during the time American artists became a force in the world.Something -that has been usurped by the homogenity of the suburbanites-come institutionalites.
To re-install artists as the apex predators of the art world -where we decide, the aesthetic criteria -not, curators ie (librarians) not, art dealers working in the anachronistic system where they reieve 50% of the proceeds and at least here in Chicago, for what? See a lot of career building going on? And last of all not critics -though obviously artists should and can work closer with this group -with the idea, we are the sharks, they are the pilot fish/hanger-ons……hoping for a free meal, derived from the scraps of what we must kill.
that came off snotty but sincerely- i know it’s a little remedial, but
A. what do art critics mean to do? and
B. how does “taking off” fit in? (other than making A possible, or is that the only advantage to being financially successful or popular- whatever taking off means)
Doesn’t public Chicago have better things to do than swan after a sports festival (and let’s face it folks, this is yet another instance in which, if we’re keeping that kind of score, Chicago is not the second, but the third choice, if that)?
When I visit Chicago now (from Virginia, where I live, for now) what I see is a place that’s nearly lost its cheap-rent industrial-ruin attractiveness. I feel like some alienated enemy of progress, as there’s hardly a corner of the city that hasn’t been greened and gentrified and made into Greater Evanston.
That means whatever happens next won’t be as much a product of an american arte povera as what happened before. What else it means, I don’;t know.
My own $0.02 about what makes Chicago distinct among american art towns is its schools: it’s SAIC — the Biggest. Fucking. Art. School. Ever. And UIC, AKA Circle, smaller, yes, but smarter. The bigness you hate versus the smartness you hate even more. But to me, that’s art Chicago: the place that, while able to support (for a while) both a commercial scene and its alternative shadow, while being dominated by one huge educational institution. That’s what was and what is yet to come, whether the coming economic horror is a “corrective” or a genuine no-fooling depression.
Anyhoo, this has been great, but we’re all moving over to Winkleman’s discussion next door, which is also great. Sorry about the hissy fit and thanks for your patience.
Well Tim not so generous -but, probably the best you can muster up.
As for we are all moving over to Winklemans…..there are 13 comments- 13. Including your relaps into vile art-speak, mannered and obtuse……you know thats why I do like critics like Jed Perl and Robert Hughes -where the focus is on clear thing/exchange of ideas not on, trading current buzz words/signifiers all in the apparent name of appearing intellectual…..its just so lame and such a product of the intitutions you mention-
Which, btw, is where the other disconnect is in what you claim. The artists here who are getting attention -or the most attention are not by any means all institutionalites in fact it may be weighted in the other direction-….Tony Fitz….Kerry James has quit UIC and pretty much denounced it -me, the Zhou Brothers -even someone like Dzine…the artists who are wielding influence here are not what or who you think they are – there is a movement towards individualism here that you seem unaware of -and in my case attacking of -when you werent even familiar with what it is that I do.
In fact, your actions towards me could be best described as demonstrating contempt prior to investigation: ie as in being pre-judical. As in prejudice, as in intellectual bigotry hence, ignorance.
Your commentary on the state of Chicago/its gentrification is somewhat more fair and accurate -but not completely true -my studio is down on the west end of Fulton Market perhaps twenty blocks from where I first started out here twenty five years ago. Its industrial down here and only zoned for that purpose……I have cerainly had no finer space in all of the time I have been here-……and yet, who can deny that Division Street, North Avenue, Wicker Park….much has been lost -Maxwell Street….
I still think this is a great city to work in -its just not a great art world here -for many of the reasons we have all discussed. Is change possible? I always believe in the idea of social psychiatry and that with recopgnition comes the possibility for change.
To quote from Picasso an artist who also wrote” What do you think an artist is?An imbecile who only has eyes if a painter or ears if if he is an musican , or a lyre at every level of his heart if he is an poet or even a boxer is he just his muscles? iOn the contrary he is at the same time a political being constantly alive to every heartrendering ,fiery, or happy events to which he responds to in every way.How it be possible to feel no interest in other people by virtuue of ivory indifferance,to detach
yourself from the life they conspiciousely brting you? No painting is not done to decorate apartments;it is an instrument of war for attack or defence against the enemy.
This quote was printed as part of the Ist editoral
of the New Art examiner Vol 1 No ! October 1974 and will be reycled in my forthcoming lecture “Defilement, a story of the Art World” at 6 pmin the cultural center on Decemember 2ed.
Thanks Derek -kind of perfect./
Artspeak? I was talking about value systems in conflict. People talk about that all the time, and damn few artsy people do. Sounds to me like you judged me and my ideas (not mine, really, as much as Velthius’) without reading or thinking.
Velthius is a sociologist, like Ranciere and Bourdieu; the current last word in French theory. Why this stuff bugs you I have no idea. It’s harmless and useful. Perl and Hughes… well, um, okay. Hughes is just a small shred of the blowhard he once was, though — no better than Jerry Salz, now. You should like Schjeldahl. He’s all standard english and loves painting. He loves Currin, though, among other painters, so I guess he’s verboten in sharkland.
Yea, Schjeldahl…… the Currin thing (he likes Kilimnick too) it is a deal breaker…….the current last word in French theory…,again…..when will the final last word come?
Actually…I am eating French theory right now -crispy duck confit -while looking through a catalog of exquisite paintings by the great London School painter Leon Kossoff -I bet Derek has seen many of these works…..
yes I have