Faint praise and passive aggression

...from Holland Cotter in his New York Times review of the 2010 Whitney Biennial. Some of these remarks are taken out of context (what sounds like a cut might be ameliorated with praise elsewhere) but the overall tone of snippy boredom is fairly accurate. Given Robert Williams' extreme, er, sensitivity to his pop culture roots, being called "the cartoon artist Robert Williams" for his big moment in the sun has gotta hurt.

"[t]he museum...can claim credit for a solid and considered product"

"Two mural-size photographs by James Casebere...have the trippy glow of Claritin ads"

"Small gouaches by the cartoon artist Robert Williams"

"Pictures by Sarah Crowner are basically Op Art folded and stitched"

"Scott Short elaborates on a production process Franz Kline used 60 years ago"

"[a]bstraction’s old content — utopian ideals, personal expression — is squeezed out... What’s left? Décor? Expensive busywork?"

"Lorraine O’Grady...rais[es] issues of race, class and the highly ambivalent nature of beauty that the new abstraction ignores"

"Exactly what the Bruce High Quality artists had in mind I don’t know, but maybe it doesn’t matter. In any case, they’re already on to something else"

"In the end it was video along with photography...that made the show tick for me"

"And there’s one example of Conceptual Art still to come. It’s by Michael Asher, and it consists of keeping the Whitney open around the clock just before the Biennial ends in late May. Mr. Asher was originally told his piece would last a week, but the museum, for budgetary reasons, has cut it back to three days"

CGI and proto-CGI

Good call from John Michael Boling on spotting this '70s Levis commercial--all analog, anticipating the look of CGI. Some real chicken/egg stuff here: Is CGI a style or did it follow the look of what had been predicted for it? As for the Friskies commercial posted by Paddy Johnson that Boling was responding to, I laughed at what was probably the unintended irony of the cat re-emerging from this sublime, tripped-out landscape to greet a lousy can of commercial cat food. Talk about a letdown. Or perhaps the cat's "trip" is what an ordinary can inspires--that's how uncritical felines are when it comes to a meal.

Tino Seaghal

Paddy Johnson reviews Tino Seaghal's Guggenheim performance work at the L magazine.

Seaghal practices the "relational" style of artwork, which consists of social interactions structured or set in motion by the artist. Seaghal famously doesn't allow photos of his works, which forces oral and written storytelling as a means of transmission but also gins up controversy among professionals accustomed to communicating in part with their cameras.

In this case guides walk visitors up the winding ramp of the emptied-out Guggenheim, and talk to you about your ideas of "progress." The guide at the base of the ramp is a child, and the guides get progressively older as they hand you off from one to the next. The performers ask you questions and pass along your answers to the next guide, but they also interrupt you and give you canned answers to certain questions.

It all sounds terribly artificial, relational in the same way that certain science-based religions and government interrogators use interaction to break down subjects and make them pliable to suggestion. Without museum sanction it could make an intriguing story; with institutional backing it's a web of rules and consensual submissive behavior that is somehow "good for you."

I didn't experience the artwork firsthand: I am being Seaghal's camera and relaying it to you via the oral tradition method.

More comments on Johnson's review.