<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>Modern Art Notes</title>
        <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/</link>
        <description>Tyler Green&apos;s modern &amp; contemporary art blog</description>
        <language>en-US</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
        <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:01:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
        
        <item>
            <title>&apos;Cezanne and American Modernism&apos; in Baltimore</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="CezanneStillLifeApplesPeachesNGA.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/CezanneStillLifeApplesPeachesNGA.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="260" height="209" />One of the best things about the <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/05/cezanne_and_beyond_in_philadel.html">sudden profusion</a> of Cezanne-and-his-progeny shows is the opportunity to see how other artists learned from -- and measure up to -- the father of modern painting. The most recent 'Cezanne &amp; Friends' show is <a href="http://www.artbma.org/exhibitions/cezanne-modernism/">"Cezanne and American Modernism,"</a> on view through May 23 at the Baltimore Museum of Art.  [Above: Paul Cezanne, <i><a href="http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/tinfo_f?object=45986">Still Life with 
Apples and Peaches</a></i>, circa 1905. National Gallery of Art.]<br /><br />The exhibition examines the irrefutable: the first American modern artists learned much from Cezanne, 16 of whose paintings are on view. This is a long-established area of scholarship but the Montclair Art Museum, whose chief curator Gail Stavitsky organized the show, says this is the first museum exhibition on the subject. (The BMA's Katherine Rothkopf is responsible for the Baltimore installation. She also co-edited <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0300147155?tag=modernartnote-20&amp;camp=213381&amp;creative=390973&amp;linkCode=as4&amp;creativeASIN=0300147155&amp;adid=1R8N45D54TDPC10S9HZD&amp;">the catalogue.</a>) Unfortunately "Cezanne and American Modernism," emphasizes inclusion at the expense of quality or new ideas. Nearly buried under dozens of derivative canvases are three strengths: An examination of the relationship between the work of Cezanne and Marsden Hartley, the suggestion
 that early American photographers owe more to Cezanne than previously 
discussed and a thought-provoking suite of paintings by Man 
Ray.<br /><br /><img alt="HartleyStillLife1912Weisman.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/HartleyStillLife1912Weisman.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="215" height="261" />The show suffers from the inclusion of too many artists. There is no question that the included 33 Americans owe a lot to 
Cezanne. The problem is that most of them are in such great debt that 
their work falls flat. Among the superfluous are Jozef Bakos, Oscar Bluemner, Patrick Henry Bruce, Arthur B. Carles, Andrew Dasburg, Leon Kroll, Alfred H. Maurer, Willard Nash, B.J.O. Nordfeldt, Walter Pach, Maurice Prendergast, Anne Estelle Rice, Morgan Russell and Abraham Walkowitz. Also, with eight works included in the show, Max Weber is over-represented to the point of overexposure. The inclusion of a smashing Weber <i>Bathers</i> (1909) from Baltimore's own collection would have made the point -- and more effectively. <br /><br />The exhibition also includes one of the most puzzling galleries I've seen in a long time: a room detailing Cezanne's influence on painters of the American West. I couldn't help but wonder if it was here simply because one of the museums on this exhibition's schedule is the Phoenix Art Museum. Inexplicably, the 'Western' gallery also includes Arshile Gorky. (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/10/09/arts/09cezanne_CA1.ready.html">Staten Island</a> is not "the West.")<br /><br />As effectively foreshadowed by last year's Philadelphia Museum of Art "Cezanne and Beyond" show, Hartley is the star. This exhibition reinforces the surprise of the Philly exhibition, that Hartley's canvases hold their own against any of Cezanne's godchildren. One of the nine Hartleys here
 -- Montclair's <i>Still Life with Leaves in Pitcher</i> (1928) -- belongs on the short-list of greatest American still-life paintings. <br /><br /><img alt="CezanneMSVBMA.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/CezanneMSVBMA.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="240" height="192" />This exhibition's examination of the relationship between Hartley and Cezanne focuses on still-life and landscape painting. (Last year's <a href="http://www.philamuseum.org/exhibitions/2009/312.html">Philadelphia show</a> focused on <a href="http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?object_id=78296">their</a> <a href="http://hirshhorn.si.edu/visit/collection_object.asp?key=32&amp;subkey=8175">portraiture.</a>) Two still-lifes borrowed from the Weisman Art Museum at the University of Minnesota provide examples of Hartley riffing on different Cezanne still-life types. <a href="http://dcl.umn.edu/mediabank/download/thumb/WAM1978_21_117">Here's</a> Hartley using Cezanne's tabletop in 1911, complete with partially opened drawer. A 1912 painting [above] shows Hartley using a Cezanne-style textile, American version, to vertically stack his composition. [Right: Cézanne, <i>Mount Sainte-Victoire Seen from the Bibémus Quarry.</i> c1897. Baltimore Museum of Art.]<br /><br />Three of the Hartley landscapes are especially strong. Two feature Hartley painting Cezanne's trademark Mount Sainte-Victoire. A 1927 painting features the mountain and its trademark cleft, but the landscape and its still-shocking post-fauve palette are all Hartley. Another 1927 painting [right] is brushier and more naturalistic, but seems more interested in shadow than Cezanne ever was. Another Hartley Provence landscape from the same period includes an aqueduct that Cezanne also painted.<br /><br />In each of these paintings Hartley demonstrates admiration of Cezanne, not fealty. Hartley builds up his painted surfaces more than Cezanne does. Hartley's brush strokes are multi-directional, whereas Cezanne's seem locked into slots. Hartley's painted surfaces are more built-up, more tactile and topographic. <br /><br /><img alt="HartleyMSV.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/HartleyMSV.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="240" height="195" />Still-lifes provide a good look at the baby steps Hartley took as he studied Cezanne. Cezanne's still-lifes typically feature fruit built up from different shades of a single color: a variety of reds or a range of greens -- but rarely both. [Right: Hartley, Mount Sainte-Victoire, 1927.]<br /><br />Hartley noticed this and plainly saw an opportunity for deviation. In 1911, at the beginning of his study of the master, Hartley tacks close to Cezanne: His apples are green and only greens, but the contrasts between the greens are sharper than Cezannes. Within a year Hartley is pushing beyond Cezanne, making individual apples from multiple colors: red, yellow and orange. It seems like a small change, but the exhibition successfully presents it as a hard-won deviation. (If there's one upside to the profusion of second-rate work on view, it's an appreciation for Hartley's ability to advance beyond genuflecting.)<br /><br /><b>Tomorrow:</b> The show's other two best ideas: Fresh looks at early American modern photography and at Man Ray.<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/cezanne_and_american_modernism.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/cezanne_and_american_modernism.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:01:09 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Weekend roundup</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<ul><li>A couple years ago three of America's top curators of contemporary art and I spent a month discussing art made <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/09/art_and_911.html">in response to 9/11.</a> In the Los Angeles Times, Richard S. Ginell makes an interesting connection between 9/11 and two key performances of Gustav Mahler's work.</li><li>Christopher Knight enthusiastically decodes the Wexner/SFMOMA-organized <a href="http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-tuymans14-2010mar14,0,3094181.story">Luc Tuymans retrospective.</a><br /></li><li>Edward Steichen spent two world wars developing aerial photography. Its use in fine art was first perfected by Californian <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2006/09/william_garnett_dead_at_89.html">William Garnett.</a> <a href="http://www.davidmaisel.com/works/works_2009.asp">David Maisel</a> has recently used aerial photography to spectacular effect. Liesel Bradner takes to the LAT to look at another aerial photographer, <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/03/aerial-photographs-capture-the-landscape-of-southern-california.html">Bill Dewey.</a>&nbsp;</li><li>The LAT's Karen Wada reports that Judith Keller, the Getty's new photo curator, is <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/03/judith-keller-new-head-of-getty-museums-photography-department-looks-toward-asia.html">expanding</a> the department's scope to include Asia.</li><li>Roberta Smith loves Otto Dix but is <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/arts/design/12dix.html?ref=design&amp;pagewanted=all">disappointed</a> that a retrospective at New York's Neue Galerie isn't a bigger, more important show.</li><li>NYTer Ken Johnson digs a Frist Center for the Visual Arts exhibition on <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/arts/design/12twilight.html?ref=design">surrealist photography in Paris</a> that has touched down at the International Center for Photography.</li><li>The Stranger's Jen Graves is not amused by Kiki Smith's <a href="http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/03/05/kiki-smith-talk-i-have-nothing-to-say">schtick.</a></li><li>Boston Globe art critic Sebastian Smee talks with <a href="http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2010/03/14/don_argott_discusses_the_art_of_the_steal_and_albert_c_barness_art_collection/?page=full">Don Argott</a>, the director of "The Art of the Steal," the new doc about the Barnes Foundation.</li></ul>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/weekend_roundup_138.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/weekend_roundup_138.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:24:24 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Contemplating the void with a smile</title>
            <description><![CDATA[And sometimes the artists and architects who participated in Contemplating the Void, the Guggenheim's exhibit-cum-auction about its own building, just tried to make us chuckle. Here are five who succeeded:<br /><br /><ul><li>From Office of Subversive Architecture, the Guggenheim is an opportunity for someone really, really thirsty to enjoy <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/office.for.subversive.architecture.osa">a macchiato.</a></li><li>From WORKac, <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/workac">a water park!</a></li><li>From Ball Nogues Studio, the world's largest <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/ball.nogues.studio">pulled candy</a> sculpture.</li><li>Pipilotti Rist is tired of your phallic references, so her "sculpture is 27m (88.5ft) high, permanently moistly, <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/pipilotti.rist">moving softly</a>, in the temperature range of 36.8 +/- 0.7C (98.2 F +/- 1.3F)."</li><li>Christian Marclay does not need yer stinkin' <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/christian.marclay">Tiger Woods.</a><br /></li><li>And a bonus link for geeks such as me: From Mona Hatoum, a cloying <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/mona.hatoum">conceptual
 art</a> reference.</li></ul>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/contemplating_the_void_with_a.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/contemplating_the_void_with_a.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:41:07 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>&apos;Authorized biographies&apos; for artists?</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="ElgerRichter.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/ElgerRichter.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="200" height="285" />Several weeks ago I received a copy of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0226203239?tag=modernartnote-20&amp;camp=213381&amp;creative=390973&amp;linkCode=as4&amp;creativeASIN=0226203239&amp;adid=196Y4ZZA7YNFJWHPVJ6M&amp;">"Gerhard Richter: A Life in Painting,"</a> by Dietmar Elger and translated into English by Elizabeth M. Solaro. It appeared to be a Richter biography. I was delighted. I particularly enjoy artist biographies. <br /><br />Then I read the dust jacket and realized that the book, written by the director of the Gerhard Richter Archive and a former secretary in Richter's studio, is essentially an authorized biography, 389 pages of praise rather than examination and contextualization. (The dust jacket boasts that the book was written with "full access to Richter and his archives.")<br /><br />The book rarely contextualizes Richter within broader history. It veers toward as-told-to territory. The prose is often grating, overly laudatory and almost always reads as if it was ripped from a press release. <br /><br />Take for example a 1974 encounter between Gilbert &amp; George and Richter, presented in PR-deadpan: "Gilbert &amp; George asked Richter to paint their portraits. Though Richter respected the couple, he had little desire to take on the assignment..." <br /><br />Or when Elger mentions MoMA's 2002 Rob Storr-curated retrospective: "As the last large exhibition before the building closed for expansion and renovation, the show marked the end of one era in the museum's distinguished history and an opening to another." Richter may not use much purple, but Elger's prose sure is. (See? I can do it too!)&nbsp; <br /><br />I suppose the book is marginally useful as an official Richter-circle version of events, dates and so on. But more interesting is that an artist has merited an "official biography" and that it has been printed by an academic press, the University of Chicago Press. Of course authorized biographies are nothing new. Plenty of celebrities 'have' them. But in terms of art and artists, as best I can remember, this is a first.]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/authorized_biographies_for_art.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/authorized_biographies_for_art.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:57:26 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Critiquing the void -- and the rest of the Guggenheim</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="RaadSarroukhGugg.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/RaadSarroukhGugg.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0pt auto 20px;" width="404" height="54" />In 1971, Guggenheim curator Edward Fry planned a Hans Haacke exhibition. Just before the show was set to open, the Guggenheim canceled it. Why? By intending to document the property holdings of New York City slumlords (some of whom were Guggenheim trustees), Haccke tweaked the establishment a bit too much. Fry later made his objections to the cancellation public and was fired from the Guggenheim. He later curated Documenta 8 and collaborated with MoMA on the 1989 "Picasso and Braque: Pioneering Cubism" exhibition and had a distinguished academic career.<br /><br />Fry died in 1992. His Associated Press obituary described him as a curator who "wanted to show how art could be rescued from the debasing influence of entertainment values, inflation and a celebrity mentality."<br /><br />Fry's spirit is back at the Guggenheim as a part of <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/home">Contemplating the Void</a>, an exhibition wherein ~200 artists propose artworks for the empty space inside the Gugg's iconic Frank Lloyd Wright building. Many of the artists use Contemplating the Void as an opportunity for institutional critique, a recently robust offshoot of conceptualism by which artists examine art museums and other places art is displayed. As their contribution to the show [detail above], artists <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/walid.raad.and.farid.sarroukh">Walid Raad and Farid Sarroukh</a> propose:<br /><br /><blockquote>1. Write news release expressing regret over the firing of Edward Fry in 1971.<br />2. Close Guggenheim Museum in New York for 38 days.<br />3. Post both news releases on the Museum's doors. <br />3. [sic] Send both news releases to all news organizations in the world.<br />4. Offer Hans Haacke a solo exhibition in New York's Guggenheim Museum in 2011. <br />5. Think of a generous and sincere way to make it up to Edward Fry's family, friends, and supporters. <br /></blockquote>Raad and Sarroukh's proposal is a reminder that it's not just journalists or critics that hold institutions accountable and responsible for their histories, but artists too. The proposal and the way the artists <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/walid.raad.and.farid.sarroukh">have presented it</a> are straightforward, clear and clever. <br /><br /><img alt="AsymptoteArchGugg.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/AsymptoteArchGugg.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="280" height="221" />In a related story, Asymptote Architecture <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/asymptote.architecture">tweaked</a> former all-Guggenheim majordomo Thomas Krens' tendency toward the big and the flashy by 'assigning' Jeff Koons to make a Krens-as-<i>Puppy</i> for the Guggenheim's void. [Right.]<br /><br /><b>Related:</b> Kendall Geers' proposal, detailed when I discussed <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/using_the_void_to_consider_tor.html">terrorism/torture and the void</a>, includes an institutional critique element. From Monday: <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/at_the_gugg_using_the_void_to.html">climate change</a> and the GuggenVoid.<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/critiquing_the_void_--_and_the.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/critiquing_the_void_--_and_the.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:18:58 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Bruce Nauman&apos;s &apos;Days&apos; in Philadelphia</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="NaumanDaysPMA.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/NaumanDaysPMA.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="280" height="219" />As I stood in the Philadelphia Museum of Art looking at Henri Matisse's perpetually fascinating <a href="http://emsworth.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/matisse-mlle-yvonne-landsberg.jpg"><i>Portrait of Mlle. Yvonne Landsberg</i></a>, I heard someone say: "Wednesday." <i><br /><br /></i>The voice seemed to be coming from behind me. I turned around to see what I might have heard, only to discover I was alone in the gallery. I returned to Mlle. Yvonne. Shrug.<br /><div><br />I walked across the hall to a gallery of early Ellsworth Kellys. While I was considering post-war Paris as a link between abstract painting and minimalism, I heard another voice: "Tuesday." This time it seemed to come from up near the ceiling. I looked up and there was nothing there, no workman on a ladder, no speaker, no nothing. This was getting weird.<br /><br />Finally, a few minutes later, I entered the gallery pictured here and I understood. Roberta Smith <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/arts/design/18nauman.html">described</a> this installation as "like paintings by Robert Ryman hanging on Fred Sandback's string sculptures," a mash-up on which I cannot improve. Those white squares are wafer-thin speakers. Each speaker projects voices reciting the days of the week. The orders in which the days are spoken varies. The speakers are both men and women, adults and children. (See <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/a_bird/4360231961/">here</a> 
for another picture.)<br /><br />The piece I was hearing -- and only later seeing -- was Bruce Nauman's <a href="http://philamuseum.org/exhibitions/375.html"><i>Days</i></a>, which was part of Nauman's Philadelphia Museum-curated, Golden Lion-winning presentation at last year's Venice Biennale. (The Italian-language version of the piece, <i>Giorni</i>, is installed across the street from the PMA's Beaux Arts HQ, in its Richard Gluckman-designed Perelman Building.) The Naumans are installed at the PMA through April 4. <br /><br /><img alt="NaumanDays2PMA.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/NaumanDays2PMA.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="280" height="189" />Inside the gallery, the recitation of the days of the week flow at the listener, one after the other after the other. But as I discovered while looking at Matisse and Kelly, <i>Days</i> also turns the surrounding galleries into an audio funhouse. One minute you're looking at a painting and a "Monday" pops up. Then you hear nothing else for 10 minutes... and then another day of the week comes out of nowhere. I found that the barrage of information was projected at me so consistently, so insistently and incessantly, that the words lost their meaning. After an hour in the PMA's galleries I had to really, really focus hard in order to remember what day of the week it really was. <br /><br />While it's easy to think of <i>Days</i> as witty and whimsical, it's dark art. Consider <i>Days</i> Nauman's latest exploration of torture. First installed last year in a prominent national pavilion in a major international exhibition at a time when America's torture of detainees was a major international issue, the artwork serves as a metaphor for confusion and dislocation enabled by the pro-torture policies of the second Bush Administration. (Nauman has made torture a key subject of his work ever <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/07/bruce_nauman_and_artistic_pres.html">since
 1981.</a>) <br /><i><br />Days</i> recalls a passage from the International Committee of the Red Cross' <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf">2007 report</a> on American torture, a report that detailed how Americans used sound and noise to torture detainees. (The report was not leaked to the media until April, 2009, but details that were in the report were reported in Jane Mayer's 2008 book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002RAR10S?tag=modernartnote-20&amp;camp=213381&amp;creative=390973&amp;linkCode=as4&amp;creativeASIN=B002RAR10S&amp;adid=01QDT2A5Z95TSAZ6TQQR&amp;">The Dark Side.</a>): <br /><br /><blockquote>One detainee who did not wish his name to be transmitted to the authorities alleged that loud music played for twenty-four hours a day throughout the one year period he believed he was held in Afghanistan. He reported that during the last month it changed to sounds of wind, waves and birds.<br /></blockquote>Nauman seems to be reminding us that even the simple and banal can be harnessed in a way that can confound and discomfort. <i>Days</i> may be the most important contemporary artwork on view in an American museum. <br /><br /><b>Related:</b> <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/07/bruce_nauman_and_the.html">Nauman's Double Steel Cage Piece</a>, Nauman <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/07/bruce_nauman_and_artistic_pres.html">begins to explore</a> torture, Nauman's <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2009/07/bruce_naumans_hanging_chairs_b.html">hanging chairs.</a><br /></div>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/bruce_naumans_days_in_philadel.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/bruce_naumans_days_in_philadel.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:57:37 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Schjeldahl&apos;s puzzling support of NuMu show</title>
            <description><![CDATA[This is from New Yorker art critic Peter Schjeldahl's <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/artworld/2010/03/15/100315craw_artworld_schjeldahl">review</a> of the New Museum's Dakis Joannou show:<br /><br /><blockquote>Even a lately chastened market pitches the exchange of hard and soft currencies -- cash and symbolic capital -- at levels beyond the reach of nearly every public institution. The New Museum is facing up to facts, I believe, with its ad-hoc dependence on Joannou.<br /></blockquote>That doesn't make sense. The NuMu doesn't collect, so whether or not the museum has the 'hard currency' to buy art isn't relevant. When it comes to loans for exhibitions, such as <a href="http://wexarts.org/ex/?eventid=4209">this one</a>, <a href="http://www.mcasd.org/exhibitions/exhibition.php?EID=196&amp;Type=past">this one</a> or <a href="http://www.contemporarystl.org/ExhibitionsSeanLanders.php">this one</a>, museums are abundantly able 
to borrow art, contemporary and otherwise. Not even the most ardent 
defenders of fluff shows have argued that it's difficult for museums to organize shows that are composed of loans from multiple sources, such as museums, multiple private collectors, artists and so on. So what exactly is "beyond the reach of" the New Museum and how does any of what Schjeldahl writes there (or in <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/artworld/2010/03/15/100315craw_artworld_schjeldahl?currentPage=all">the piece</a>) justify its "dependence on Joannou? Non-sensical.<br /><br />Furthermore, no one has argued that museums should stop borrowing art from private collectors for curatorially-driven exhibitions. Numerous commentators (both in journalism and in academia) have argued that museums should not present exhibitions from <i>single</i> private collections. (Or, in the case of <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_elizabet.html">this</a> <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_broun_on.html">upcoming</a> Smithsonian American Art Museum exhibition, from two linked private collections.) So what is Schjeldahl talking about? Can the defenders of these fluff shows defend them only by creating strawmen?<br /><br />(Also: Since when did anyone expect art museums to compete with private collectors when it comes to acquiring art? Where did this idea that art museums should be competitive entrants in the roulette of the art market come into vogue?)<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/schjeldahls_non-sensical_suppo.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/schjeldahls_non-sensical_suppo.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:03:40 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday links</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<ul><li><a href="http://www.moma.org/explore/inside_out/2010/03/08/claes-oldenburg-conservation-of-floor-cake-week-5/">Deconstructed cake</a> is not just a dessert.</li><li>One over the most interesting events of the Winkleman/Powhida/Dalton project <a href="http://hashtagclass.blogspot.com/">#class</a> was Yevgeniy Fiks' 'Communist Tour of MoMA.' James Wagner has <a href="http://jameswagner.com/2010/03/yevgeniy_fiks_names.html">pictures</a> and Barry Hoggard has a thorough <a href="http://bloggy.com/2010/03/yevgeniy_fiks_commun.html">accounting.</a> <b>CORRECTION:</b> This was <b>not</b> a #class event. <a href="http://www.stamatina.net/">Stamatina Gregory</a> organized the performance with Fiks as a guerrilla tour, and the audience was a result of listing the tour (location undisclosed) as an Armory Show VIP event.<br /></li><li>Jonathan Jones reminds us why Christoph Buchel's <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2010/feb/24/sex-klimt-gallery-austria">toying with Gustav Klimt</a> is fitting. In a related story, I think the only Klimt 'beech forest' painting on view in a U.S. museum is at the Baltimore Museum of Art.</li><li>Documentary filmmaker Gavin Heslet is making mini-docs about artists and is <a href="http://thecreativelives.com/">posting them here.</a> Coming up: Barry McGee and Mark Dean Veca. Sweet.<br /></li></ul>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/tuesday_links_34.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/tuesday_links_34.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:50:02 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Using the void to consider torture</title>
            <description><![CDATA[In a modest proposal for the Guggenheim's <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html">Contemplating the Void</a> exhibition, Kendell Geers provided a the museum with a text-based work from 1995 titled <i><a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/kendell.geers">By Any Means Necessary</a></i>, a digital print of white words on a black background. <br /><br /><blockquote>A bomb has been hidden, somewhere within this exhibition, set to explode at a time known to the artist alone. While it is not my intention to kill anyone, that risk does exist. I apologize in advance for any injuries, fatalities, damage or other inconvenience that my work, will cause. In this matter I have no choice, being as much a victim of the course of Art History and contemporary politics as those who are hurt in the process. I take consolation in the fact that chance will be entirely responsible for the final statistics.<br /></blockquote>Installed in the context of this exhibition, the work reads two ways. First, it's an Ed Ruscha, <a href="http://hirshhorn.si.edu/visit/collection_object.asp?key=32&amp;subkey=12095"><i>Los Angeles County Museum on Fire</i></a>-style institutional critique, an updating of the artist vs. institution discourse that has existed at least as long as museums have embraced contemporary work.<br /><br /><img alt="PowerhouseGugg.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/PowerhouseGugg.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="200" height="253" />But given Geers' longstanding interest in abuse-of-power and institutional repression, it's hard to miss Geers' old-as-new proposal as a critique of post-torture America. The Bush administration lawyers who wrote the memos that ended up condemning dozens of detainees to torture have claimed that they <i>did not intend</i> for anyone to be torture, but certainly their memos created a situation whereby <i>that risk did exist.</i> The Bush administration said it had <i>no choice</i> when it came to approving torture, that America's safety mandated law-breaking. Like Geers, the Bushies have accepted no <i>responsibility</i> for the <i>final statistics</i> that resulted from their memo-writing. You can read the rest of <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/kendell.geers">Geers' piece here.</a><br /><br />If there's a surprise in Contemplating the Void it's that a number of artists and architects used the exhibition's lighthearted, make-it-for-show-and-auction conceit to say something about post-torture America.<br /><br />Los Angeles' Neil M. Denari Architects makes whimsy out of the way politicians have tried to train us to fear the next attack: The firm puts an <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/neil.m.denari.architects.nmda">intact airliner</a> in the middle of the Gugg, a way of confronting us with our fear and revealing it to be shiny. Powerhouse Company, a Rotterdam-based architecture firm writes that the Guggenheim <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/powerhouse.company">"reminds"</a> them of what Jeremy Bentham, inventor of the Panopticon prison called 'the sentiment of an invisible omniscience. Like <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/nari.ward">Nari Ward</a>, Powerhouse used the void to consider surveillance, specifically guard towers and references to Guantanamo Bay. <br /><br /><b>Previously:</b> The GuggVoid and <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/at_the_gugg_using_the_void_to.html">climate change.</a><br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/using_the_void_to_consider_tor.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/using_the_void_to_consider_tor.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:31:02 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>At the Gugg, using the void to contemplate the world</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="SouFujimotoGugg.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/SouFujimotoGugg.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="160" height="356" />The current New York survey of contemporary artists' take on our world isn't the Whitney Biennial or the embarrassing installation of a private collector's trophy case at the New Museum. Somehow NYC's best current show of artists thinking about our world is a manufactured conceit of a self-benefiting auction: the Guggenheim's "Contemplating the Void." <br /><br />The concept is simple: The middle of the Guggenheim is empty, how to fill it? Guggenheim curators Nancy Spector and David van der Leer picked ~200 artists and architects and urged them to be fantastical. They were. Their cleverness turned what could have been institutional self-infatuation into an unusually clear look at what creative leaders are thinking about right now. The list includes climate change, energy and environmental challenges, torture, terrorism and how we respond to it, and institutional critique. Finally, some of the proposals are just plain funny. Each day this week I'll look at how artists projected one of these interests into the GuggenVoid.<br /><br /><u><b>The environment</b></u><br />I'd guesstimate that at least 10 percent of the work on view touches on eco- issues. Pessimism about our present environmental conditioned reigns and participants see that climate change is happening and suggest how we might deal with it within 
the presented conceit. Surprisingly few artists take Josephine 
Meckseper's tack: She proposes confronting Gugg visitors with a major 
driver of climate change: <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/josephine.meckseper">fossil

 fuel extraction.</a> Annette Messager's <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/annette.messager">drawing</a>
 prefers poetry to sledgehammer.<br /><br />Several artists and architects seem to have drawn inspiration from Alan Weisman's recent book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0312427905?tag=modernartnote-20&amp;camp=213381&amp;creative=390973&amp;linkCode=as4&amp;creativeASIN=0312427905&amp;adid=10H543FZBMP519J309YH&amp;">The World Without Us,</a> which imagines what would happen to our planet and our man-made environments if man ceased to exist. Think Smithson-ian entropy on 'roids. <br /><br /><img alt="HWKNGugg.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/HWKNGugg.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="280" height="140" />Tokyo's Sou Jujimoto Architects imagines the Guggenheim as claimed by a <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/sou.fujimoto.architects">four-tree</a> redwood (?) forest 10,000 years hence. [Above.] Seattle-based Olson Kundig Architects imagines an abandoned Guggenheim as an <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/olson.sundberg.kundig.allen.architects">urban market</a>/ranch/power-generator (a bit of futurism possibly inspired by urban farming experiments already underway in Detroit and proposed for other cities). Christoph Buchel takes note of the Gugg's recent preservation-motivated structural tune-up-and-makeover, and <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/christoph.buchel">proposes</a> "aging a face-lifted museum." Denmark-based N55 suggested that powerful institutions are destroying our world and urged a common-man, Guggenheim-based <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/n55">intervention</a> of sorts.<br /><br />Some of the nature-based interventions into Frank's Void involve less degeneration and more instigation: Tokyo's Itami Jun Architects <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/itami.jun.architects.co..ltd">uses nature</a> as a decorative element, imagining a planned park inside the Gugg. West 8, a Rotterdam-based landscape design and urban planning firm, also envisions <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/west.8">planned park land.</a> So too New York's <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/hwkn.hollwichkushner">HWKN.</a> [Above, at left.]<br /><br />Most entrants raise important issues in a playful way. Consider the proposal from Norway's Bergen Saunders Architecture: It presents the Guggenheim's void as post-post-modern pastoral... and suggests that Frank Lloyd Wright <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html#/proposals/saunders.architecture">might have approved.</a><br /><br /><b>Part two:</b> Using the void to contemplate <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/using_the_void_to_consider_tor.html">torture.</a><br /><br /><b>Related:</b> The Guggenheim has put together a slow, cumbersome, Flash-driven <a href="http://web.guggenheim.org/exhibitions/exhibition_pages/void/index.html">website</a> for the show. It's thorough and enabling, but still...&nbsp; I enjoyed the two different responses from LAT architecture critic Christopher Hawthorne and NYT art critic Roberta Smith. Hawthorne puts the show in the context of <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/02/critics-notebook-for-architects-it.html">challenges</a> facing architects. Smith puts it in the context <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/arts/design/19void.html?adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1268067912-iZEfyD4luN9gPgWvCo4WUQ&amp;pagewanted=all">of art.</a> Reading them back-to-back is the way to go.<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/at_the_gugg_using_the_void_to.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/at_the_gugg_using_the_void_to.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:10:38 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Weekend roundup</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<ul><li>In the LAT, Holly Myers profiles Los Angeles-based <a href="http://www.latimes.com/la-ca-ochoa7-2010mar07,0,3371741.story">Ruben Ochoa</a>, who opens at the MCASD <a href="http://www.mcasd.org/exhibitions/exhibition.php?EID=608&amp;Type=future">this month.</a></li><li>Ken Price is the subject of a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/arts/design/07price.html?ref=design&amp;pagewanted=all">Sunday NYT profile</a> by Nick Stillman. Remarkable: Stillman says Price has arrived because he has some commercial shows going on right now. Seriously? Price has had a major career: He is in significant museum collections. Seventeen years ago he was examined in a retrospective by two of America's most respected museums: the Walker and the Menil. In 2004-05 highly regarded Chinati did a <a href="http://www.chinati.org/visit/exhibition04price.php">beautiful installation</a> of Price's work. Now one of America's top curators (Stephanie Barron) at another of America's top museums (LACMA) is organizing a Price retro... and Price needs a couple of commercial shows to have "a moment?" How small, how insulting.<br /></li><li>Roberta Smith <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/arts/design/05dakis.html?ref=design&amp;pagewanted=all">reviews the show</a> that asks the bourgeois to pony up $12 to see a billionaire's shopping list. (The whole idea seems like a Michael Asher waiting to happen, right?) Smith covers ground previously covered by James Wagner (without mentioning him), creates strawmen to oppose (Roberta: You're good enough to take on actual points made by actual people; you don't need to go all George W. Bush on us) and finally punts on the key issue. <br /></li><li>Pretty much every review of the Whitney Biennial I've seen has been written for people who are already down the art world rabbit-hole or who just want to feel good about feeling good about the art world. ("[I]t's the "Obama biennial," said one reviewer. Which means both nothing and whatever you want it to mean.) It takes the Village Voice's Christian Viveros-Faune a few paragraphs to get started, but he <a href="http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-03-02/art/welcome-to-the-mixed-up-dialed-down-2010-whitney-biennial/">gets beyond</a> that narrowness.</li><li>Later this month, I'm pretty sure I'm going to get lost in Dallas-Fort Worth looking <a href="http://www.mysanantonio.com/entertainment/Public_art_redefined_151_Gonzalez-Torres_billboards.html">for these.</a><br /></li></ul>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/weekend_roundup_137.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/weekend_roundup_137.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:37:32 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Back Monday</title>
            <description>I&apos;m traveling. Back on Monday. </description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/back_monday_6.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/back_monday_6.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:51:51 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>The DIA shows art, art leads to civic engagement</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="Let'sSaveMI.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/Let%27sSaveMI.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="200" height="296" />I think that the best institution-driven ideas about how art can be a point of community engagement, tend to come from the middle of the country, places where tourists don't fill the museums (New York, San Francisco) or where museums can't just drop money on a European museum and <a href="http://www.seattleartmuseum.org/exhibit/exhibitDetail.asp?eventID=18788">call it a show.</a> There's nothing wrong with Picasso, Titian, etc., but while that show might get people in the door once, it doesn't build a relationship with community the way broader relationship-building does.<br /><br />That's why I love what the Detroit Institute of Arts is doing in partnership with <a href="http://letssavemichigan.com/">Let's Save Michigan</a>, a project of the <a href="http://www.mml.org/home.html">Michigan Municipal League.</a> First, the DIA launched this show: <a href="http://www.dia.org/exhibitions/item.asp?webitemid=1865">Government Support for the Arts: WPA Prints from the 1930s.</a> <br /><br />Then the museum asked visitors (mostly kids) to respond to the question, "What if you were a WPA artist working today?" The museum took what the kids made and <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/detroitinstituteofarts/sets/72157622901746919/">put it on Flickr.</a> Cute stuff.<br /><br />Finally, the museum 'used the show' to partner with Let's Save Michigan on a WPA-inspired poster contest. The idea was that the two organizations would ask graphic designers, artists and others what ideas should revive Michigan and to show it in poster form. Here are <a href="http://letssavemichigan.com/poster-contest">the 60 finalists.</a> The winner will be picked by visitors to Let's Save Michigan's site. The voting ends March 15. Don't miss it. [Image: <a href="http://www.timgralewski.com/">Tim Gralewski's</a> submission.] ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/the_dia_shows_art_art_leads_to.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/the_dia_shows_art_art_leads_to.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 06:50:02 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Q&amp;A with SAAM director Broun on Rockwell, part two</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="AndDanielBooneComesToLife.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/AndDanielBooneComesToLife.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="225" height="279" /><i>Continued from <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_elizabet.html">part one of a Q&amp;A</a></i><i> </i><i>with Smithsonian American Art Museum director Elizabeth Broun on the exhibition </i><i><a href="http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2010/rockwell/">"Telling

 Stories</a>: Norman Rockwell from the Collections of Steven Spielberg 
and George Lucas." The show opens on July 2.</i><br /><br /><b>MAN: So if the museum wanted to do a Rockwell show, if it accepted the premise of the exhibition, why not give the curators the freedom of curatorial inquiry to include work beyond those two private collections? <br /><br />Elizabeth Broun:</b> I would give two answers to that. They have collected on some level subliminally and on some level consciously, they have collected the works that make the case extremely well. There are direct quotes. There is a wonderful work of Gary Cooper getting made up by the makeup artist, <i>The Texan</i>, and there are images that directly relate. There's another great one, <i>--And Daniel Boone Comes to Life</i> [at right, 1923] on the Underwood Portable, a young guy at a typewriter and it's almost like there's a thought-bubble above his head and he's envisioning Daniel Boone crossing the Cumberland Gap and it's about trying to script something on paper that's in your head. So they have collected works that are right in line with how you make this argument. There is a pertinence to seeing that it took directors and producers to see this and they see a kindred spirit. We think it underscores and adds [to the show]. I don't think the show would be stronger [with outside work]. I don't know that you would gain by saying, 'We borrowed four things from the Rockwell Museum.' To me the point that it was movie-industry people who have been profoundly impacted by this is kind of a virtuous circle of engagement in the project.<br /><br />I can tell you this: Unlike the shows you have complained about where people are flattering private collectors or showing board members' works this is not a [situation] where we have ulterior motives. [Ed: Over several years MAN has written about museums such as the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the New Museum, the National Gallery of Art, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, etc. presenting single-collector shows.] I've never met or laid eyes on Spielberg or Lucas personally. It's all been handled professionally at the staff level. We know the public likes that aspect and it's fun to see that collectors have done this. I don't know that we have much to offer by way of enhancement&nbsp; of either Rockwell or Spielberg or Lucas. It seems to me that the normal concerns aren't relevant here. <br /><br /><b>MAN: I obviously haven't seen the show yet - it opens July 2 - but will there be materials in the galleries or near the galleries pertaining to Spielberg and Lucas?<br /><br />EB:</b> It's all Rockwell. It's a very tight show, it's in our first-floor galleries... a space that accommodates 55 or 60 paintings. All those other associations are in the catalogue and we will tease them out through the run of the show in our programs. We're having a film series about films from Rockwell's time... so there will be an ongoing movie series in the auditorium. <br /><br /><b>MAN: The show's credits include the line "the Museum also gratefully acknowledges the contributions of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg." Are they financially contributing to the presentation? <br /><br />EB:</b> They are each making a modest, five-figure contribution. All the costs of the show and the book are covered by an exclusive corporate grant from Booz Allen Hamilton. But the supplemental support from Spielberg and Lucas allows us to extend programs and ancillary activities. We deliberately did not want their funds to produce the show or the catalogue. <br /><br /><img alt="RockwellBoyOnHighDive.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/RockwellBoyOnHighDive.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="225" height="296" /><b>MAN: How does that work? I don't work in a museum or at the Smithsonian so maybe this is a silly question, but is there some kind of firewall or assignment of monies raised into certain funds or...?<br /><br />EB:</b> It's a kind of consensus. We've discussed it throughout the Smithsonian with colleagues and also with our own administrators. Our feeling is whether it's a collector or a dealer or someone who has some kind of interest in the project, they should not be providing core support for the project. The project should be achievable without their support, but if there's things that makes the project better - programming or films and not core support -- it's OK to [accept that] in a modest way. You just don't want to be depending on funding from an interested party for achieving the main goals of the project. Fortunately, thanks to Booz Allen Hamilton, we're in good shape. [Image: Norman Rockwell, <i>Boy on High Dive</i>, 1947.]<br /><b><br />MAN: So I understand the link between the premise of the show and the collectors, but do you worry that these kinds of shows validate the spending habits and taste of certain influential or famous collectors? <br /><br />EB:</b> I would refer you to our track record. If we were out chasing wealthy collectors and validation -- that's just not what we do. The same time we're working hard on the Rockwell show, the one I'm fundraising for right now is a powerful but rather quiet despairing project focused on none other than George Ault, on the home front in World War II. So it's just not our nature to be out there chasing celebrity collectors. That's not what we do. We think pretty much all of our projects have serious, substantive purpose and we take a lot of pride in that. <br /><br />We're also happy when a project has wide appeal. We like that, we're populist by nature. We like having a wide audience and we like having a renovated building that is indeed an attraction... We have a long record of commitment to scholarship: We have the largest fellowship program&nbsp; in American art in the country. We have the largest research databases of any institution anywhere in the country for the study of American art. We see ourselves as profoundly devoted to advancing the understanding of [American art]. If you look at our track record we're not that lavishly funded and we devote a major share of what we get from the government and what we raise from private sources to scholarly pursuits. It's wrong to suggest we're out there trying to snag the next celebrity collection. In this case we happen to have celebrities, but the reason we love having them is their insight tells us something new about Rockwell that has been ignored and their insight came because they are in this industry.<br /><br /><b>MAN: You seem to be suggesting that if this show were at the New Museum or somewhere else that it might raise more legitimate questions? Maybe it's unfair to be positioning that question in a way that encourages you to say something about another institution, but I gather you understand what I'm asking.<br /><br />EB:</b> Every museum has a slightly different profile. I guess I'm not saying if someone else did the same show it would be different. This show would stand on its own as a solid contribution to scholarship no matter where it was produced. <br /><br /><b>MAN: The Smithsonian is a quasi-federal institution. As you know, overall 70 percent of the Smithsonian budget comes from federal appropriation. I'm sure you grappled with this or talked in house about whether it was appropriate for a quasi-federal institution to present an exhibition of the work of two private collectors. <br /><br />EB:</b> Whether it was appropriate for a quasi-federal museum is not an issue. The issue that we did discuss was whether there was a serious 'there there,' or whether this was just a confluence of three big names. We did have a number of conversations about that and teasing out these understandings about what these relationships were and what the substance was. And yes, it was crucial to a decision about doing&nbsp; the show. We would not have done the show if it were just three big names coming together. <br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_broun_on.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_broun_on.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:25:43 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Q&amp;A with SAAM director Elizabeth Broun on Rockwell</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<img alt="TheTexan.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/TheTexan.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt;" width="225" height="305" /><i>In July</i><i> the Smithsonian American Art Museum will launch a show called "<a href="http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2010/rockwell/">Telling Stories</a>: Norman Rockwell from the Collections of Steven Spielberg and George Lucas." As a continuation of MAN's coverage of so-called fluff shows -- museum exhibitions of single, or in this case two, private collections -- I talked with SAAM director Elizabeth Broun. In a related story and in what would be a first for a Smithsonian art museum, SAAM is <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/02/in_smithsonian_first_saam_to_c.html">considering selling tickets</a> for early-entry to this exhibition. </i>[Image: Norman Rockwell, <i>The Texan</i>, 1930.]<br /><br /><b>MAN: Could you introduce the exhibition, tell us what it's about and explain why the museum is doing it.<br /><br />Elizabeth Broun: </b>You're well-aware that Norman Rockwell for the most part was ignored by serious museums and art historians until recently. He's still kind of unexplored territory and we think he's still is not taken fully as seriously because that 'illustrator' label is attached to him. So when this idea came to us - I confess we did not invent this concept - the idea that there was a significant connection between Rockwell and Hollywood and Rockwell and the movies, it came as a surprise to us. <br /><br />It takes one to know one and it really is the two collectors who have come up with the idea that Rockwell made art as if he were directing movies. Virginia Mecklenburg is our senior curator... she spent a long time researching it. We sent her manuscript out for peer review and the comments we got back were like, "I believe this book constitutes a lasting contribution to the field founded on absolutely first-rate research and thought. Its focus is clearly stated and argued." <br /><br />We think there is new scholarly work here, new discoveries and it really centers on three different relationships between Rockwell and the movies. The first is biographical. People haven't integrated the idea that in&nbsp; 1930 he married Mary Barstow, who was a Hollywood girl, an L.A. person. She died in 1959. For 25 years -- all the time they were raising their kids -- they would trek west on holidays and vacations and would go visit the grandparents in Hollywood. He got to know the movie people, got acquainted with them, designed studio posters... In 1966 he was given a non-speaking role in the re-make of "Stagecoach." <br /><br />At first you hear 'Rockwell and Hollywood' and it sounds like a collision of two alien cultures, but he was there a lot and knew people. In his biography there is a clear basis for this idea that he was looking and thinking about movies.<br /><br />The second idea is the process that he used, the elaborate staging of his pictures. He labored over what costumes [characters] wore. He did lots and lots of drawings and he used individual little props. The idea that Spielberg and Lucas came up with is that like them, he was a story-teller -- but he told his narrative in a single frame. They think they recognize a kind of kindred spirit, in a way... It is an interesting way of looking at what he's doing. There is something kind of insightful about that. Rockwell once said, 'If I hadn't become a painter, I would have liked to have been a movie director.' That tells you it's in his brain too. <br /><br />Third, widening the scope and looking at what Rockwell was doing at different times in his career and matching it up with what the movies were then: During the '30s and the&nbsp; war years, he was doing the unlikely American hero, the 'patriotic Joe, all for the cause.' It's like Frank Capra movies. You start looking at individual characters. Mickey Rooney was sort of a Rockwell kid. There's a kind of correlation that's loose. I don't think that [curator] Virginia Mecklenburg would say we're making a one-to-one, who-influenced-who-in-what-year argument, but [both Rockwell and film are] responding to a mass appeal, and to the popular themes related to their time. <br /><br /><img alt="RockwellSpiritofAmerica.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/RockwellSpiritofAmerica.jpg" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 20px 20px;" width="200" height="285" />Look at the war years... Rockwell wants to do <i>The Four Freedoms</i> to serve the cause and Roosevelt has given his speech and the challenge is to persuade Americans, who are isolationist by nature, that it's worth it to commit their sons to go abroad and fight a war. Rockwell kind of brings that story home by locating those four freedoms in his little American township environs. He personalizes the war for Americans by bringing it home. It's very much like what Capra does in his films, called "Why We Fight." <br /><br />Even later, in the '50s [1959], Rockwell does a picture called <i>The Jury</i>, a kind of cute picture of the only woman on a jury. All the men are smoking cigarettes and [they seem to be] pressuring her and she's the one holdout. It turns out it was done around same time as "Twelve Angry Men." In 1957, I think... women were restricted from sitting on juries in 18 states. Rockwell's picking up on little things that are topical enough to show up in the movies too. There is a kind of ongoing relationship, maybe less direct, specific influence one-to-the-other, but because the movies and Rockwell are both going for mass audiences and appealing to what people are concerned about in the moment, they're working the same field of interest. For all those reasons we think this show has an important angle on Rockwell that no one has paid attention to. It doesn't answer the question, 'Is he a great artist or not?', but it makes him a more interesting artist. <br /><b><br />MAN: Is all the work from those two private collections, or have you added work from your collection or elsewhere?<br /><br />EB:</b> It is entirely drawn from those two collections and we think that's related. These two movie people figured that out long before any of the art historians. They've been collecting Rockwell for a long time and they respond on all those levels, but also to the themes. Steven Spielberg was an Eagle Scout and he collected a painting by Rockwell of an Eagle Scout. [Image above: Norman Rockwell, <i>Spirit of America</i>, 1929.]There are all these personal connections they find. They too are patriotic and are concerned with war themes. They're concerned about social issues. Lucas, in part, is doing fantasy entertainment for kids. In "Raiders of the Lost Ark" there's the unlikely hero, the figure who is dropped into circumstances and emerges as a hero. So we think it's not just coincidental, nor are we just reaching out to grab celebrity. We think it is an important part of the project. This was not recognized first out of the art academy, it was recognized by people who are in the industry who say, 'Wow, he's one of us.'<br /><br />It reminds me of David Hockney's&nbsp; book "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0142005126?tag=modernartnote-20&amp;camp=213381&amp;creative=390973&amp;linkCode=as4&amp;creativeASIN=0142005126&amp;adid=05YQGQ82DH0HTC9FP2ZE&amp;">Secret Knowledge.</a>" It took a painter to figure out that artists since Caravaggio have been using lenses and mirrors [as drawing aides].<br /><br /><i>Part two <a href="http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_broun_on.html">is here.</a></i><br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_elizabet.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/man/2010/03/qa_with_saam_director_elizabet.html</guid>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:00:43 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>
