As Melia pointed out in the comments earlier, Jerry
Saltz does his version of a reality check regarding art
(probably as a work
up to his next Babylon article, due out soon). Does art change the world? Well
any action creates some change of course but leadership matters more of course.
Thus a better question is, which leaders look at art as a way to sharpen their
take on the past, present and future? Would most of the art today help a leader
with a truly reflexive and probing intellect all that much? Frankly, most of the allegedly important art today spends more energy limiting its context and exposure to questions rather than sticking its neck out so as to expand exposure and gain
more contextual examination. I'm not talking about populism, just expressing
a wish for an often nonexistent climate that could promote more critical examination.
Back to Jerry's article, I did like the picture included of the Marc
Grotjahn, whose delicate "butterfly" abstractions
seem to reference
the old missive about how a Lepidoteran flapping its wings in Ohio can help create
a hurricane in Taipei. The funniest bit was the conclusion about art being like
a cat not giving instantaneous or direct feedback... or is it a parallel to
how the Greeks used a certain ambivalence as a useful element in their art?
Ok it goes back way farther back than the Greeks, into Mesopotamia at places
like Ur but for most history challenged Americans this digression this is a
Also, there is this rather wide-ranging interview with Charles
Saatchi in the Guardian
. Nobody seems to know what the next thing (or two)
will be these days but history does favor the bold. Saatchi is bold, which appeals
to me in this era of too-much trend analysis. That said his USA Today show looks kinda dull, even very 2004
. As expected I like the Grotjahn and the Schmidberger (they have legs), everything else seems pretty much old news that we heard years ago or heard better from other artists. An example: Banks Violette
vs. Matthew Barney (not in the show cause hes older)? It is no contest, I dont even like Barney much but still he's was more relevant to American art in 2006 than Violette.
Thanks for signing in,
. Now you can comment. (sign
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by
the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear
on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)