Well it was ABMB
and refreshingly instead of the obligatory and inane pieces on how
art is a hot investment there were numerous substantial opinion pieces on the
state of the art world. Art, no matter how much it costs is simply a way to
understand that which resists understanding... it should be as much if not more
of a personal existential investment as it is a monetary expenditure. That is
the one thing I really like about collectors in Portland, nobody... no matter
how much they spend is doing it just for show.
Jerry Saltz takes on the
Carsten Holler (AKA art as playground) show.
On a similar note I discussed
Holler and Alfredo Jaar at length last week
. The sense is that this type
of show is designed to draw in audiences rather than hit the right notes...
ie be challenging rather than diversionary entertainment put on by the 1%. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater though, sometimes a carnival show can shake up the status quo.
Saatchi blasted art oligarchs
who collect and inflate the blue chip art
market rather than develop a deeper relationship. This typical art rant means
something only because Charles Saatchi is saying it and therefore has the weight
of a man who has been wrongly accused of much the same thing. The difference
is he has taste, faith in the difficulties of Art and has catalyzed not just
careers but entire art movements; YBA, Leipzig etc. There is a learning curve
and serious collectors like Saatchi and Broad are special. They have done it
for a long time and it is obvious they keep their own counsel as patrons...
they aren't simply acting on the tips of advisers, they developed a certain
personal biography through the art they collect and present.
To get at the issue from a different angle, how about a look at the
crossroads of art and neuroscience
. I'm always shocked at how much the art
world doesn't look at or exploit scientific approaches.
Also, it is Turner
... if only Northwest
shows at major museums like the CNAA's had similar ability to generate discussion
Too often they are a cavalcade of already past their prime names or a bouillabaisse
of so many artists that an actual curatorial thesis is impossible to form...
making the institution's intrigue the defacto subject rather than the host of
avenues for new understanding.
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.)