{"id":1616,"date":"2010-03-01T19:52:30","date_gmt":"2010-03-02T03:52:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp\/2010\/03\/matthew_kangas_-_because_i_say\/"},"modified":"2010-03-01T19:52:30","modified_gmt":"2010-03-02T03:52:30","slug":"matthew_kangas_-_because_i_say","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/2010\/03\/matthew_kangas_-_because_i_say.html","title":{"rendered":"Matthew Kangas – because I say so"},"content":{"rendered":"

Seattle needs all the critics it can get. In that sense, it needs Matthew Kangas<\/a>, long-time Seattle correspondent for Art in America<\/i>. His contribution to criticism began in the 1970s and continues to the present, with a review<\/a> on Artdish of the Tacoma Art Museum’s A Concise History of Northwest Art<\/i><\/a>.<\/p>\n

Even if his byline were missing, I’d recognize his magisterial tone. His opinions impersonate facts. Because he states them, they are true. Beyond their imperative, they need no supporting evidence. I haven’t yet seen this show, but the solemn clarity of Kangas’ intelligence doesn’t carry me through this piece without a few quibbles.<\/p>\n

First<\/b>, he doesn’t think the museum’s plan to expand its definition of Northwest art to include British Columbia is sound. <\/p>\n

The TAM Board of Trustees approved a 10-year plan for the collection in 2009 that included a “strategy” to “expand the definition of Northwest art to include British Columbia and Alaska.” Although noble and sensible in principle, this is one aspect of U.S.-Canada cultural relationships that has never been truly reciprocal. We exhibit and acquire their artists; BC art museums never show Seattle artists let alone acquire their work (their state-funded cultural policies won’t allow it). Maybe Hushka and Bullock have miscalculated in this sense: better to stick to the continental US.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The Vancouver Art Gallery<\/a> owns the work of American artists. VAG’s focus is B.C. first and Canada second. That’s a focus, not a rule. Even if there were such a rule, TAM is right to consider the Northwest within a context of geographical reality. TAM is not horse trading. It’s building a record of art in this region. Leaving out B.C. is consigning the collection to parochialism. <\/p>\n

Second<\/b>, he decrees that TAM needs to rely less on donations, which he calls “hand-outs,” as if the museum had lined up at a soup kitchen, empty bowl extended. Nearly all art museums rely on donations. The job of curators is, in part, to shape those donations, inspiring patrons to make gifts of what the museum most desires. If museums had to buy what they wanted, they’d all be hunger artists.<\/p>\n

Third<\/b>, he tosses off opinions of individual artists. In this review, there are no other kind. Why does Christian Staub<\/a> “stand head and heels” over all other photographers in the show? I love Staub’s work and think it’s fearsomely underrated, but in a review, shouldn’t at least one reason for its value be given?<\/p>\n

An attack on Claire Cowie<\/a> needs a little more than this: <\/p>\n

Sky Village (2005), by Claire Cowie, seems a typically vacuous example of her thin, overrated watercolor paintings.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Yes, they’re thin. They’re watercolors. If he’s going to call them vacuous, isn’t he required to back it up? No, he isn’t. He’s Matthew Kangas, the art critic equivalent of Moses. He comes down from his mountain with the rules in his hands. Not his rules. The rules. On the other hand, I appreciate his confidence, which is not entirely misplaced. If he bothered to articulate the basis of his thinking, it would be worth reading.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Seattle needs all the critics it can get. In that sense, it needs Matthew Kangas, long-time Seattle correspondent for Art in America. His contribution to criticism began in the 1970s and continues to the present, with a review on Artdish of the Tacoma Art Museum’s A Concise History of Northwest Art. Even if his byline […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-1616","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-uncategorized","7":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1616"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1616\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1616"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1616"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/anotherbb\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}