Archive for the ‘art – others’ Category
One of the bones of contention regarding Ryder Ripps' recent Postmasters exhibition, consisting of iPhone-distorted images based on a sportswear model's Instagram photos, was his use of the model's last name "Ho" as the show's title. Some New York critics lambasted him for this. Karen Archey in Frieze [sign-in required] wrote:
Ho is Canadian with French and Chinese ancestry, hence the show’s title is a play on her last name that manages to be racist and misogynist simultaneously.
Johanna Fateman in Artforum added:
The most scathing critics of his new work characterize it as banal theft and sexist defacement of a woman’s images, calling out the puerile double entendre of the show’s title while they’re at it.
Artforum contributing writer Sarah Nicole Prickett tweeted:
Spends two weeks defending his feminist credentials, incredulously, after being like, called out for having a show called "Ho" as if double entendres didn't exist...
And yet, the model Adrianne Ho jokingly labels her own Twitter account "Follow a Ho! SWEAT THE STYLE":
And is profiled in "Status" magazine in an article with the title Not Your Average Ho, containing still more jokes at her own expense:
Men dominate streetwear, but with 25-year-old muse ADRIANNE HO being Hypebeast’s pick as “The Unofficial Face of Menswear,” people might want to think twice. She appreciates a good pun and often has a self-deprecating streak in reference to her surname. Her Twitter account is filled with tweets like “It’s hot out here for a Ho” and “Ho on the go.”
Are we "slut-shaming" here? Was Ripps? The arena for the slur was a prominent NY gallery, where privileged left-of-center bohemians bait other privileged left-of-center bohemians to claim the moral high ground. Shaming a "slut" is just as tacky in that world as being one. We could talk about Ho's "interior colonization" in using an epithet of her oppressors to self-identify. Or we could talk about "click-whoring" -- a term often used without gender association and practiced by many art magazines and non-profits in our current dystopian era of pervasive social media. We didn't talk about those things because none of the critics did any investigation to see where the use of "Ho" in its double meanings originated. It was presumed to be a one-sided gender slur and left at that (to the artist's reputational detriment).
hat tips melipone and foot
chapman bros; object by pfifferking
Amazing how some artwork can cause a critic to lose all sense of proportion. Frieze's Karen Archey went nuclear this month over Ryder Ripps' instagram paintings (for example, Mona Lisa, 2014, oil on canvas, above). Last year the New Museum-affiliated website Rhizome.org had some vaguely supportive things to say about the same body of work:
Ryder Ripps is thinking about Instagram's "mawkishly sentimental tone to everyday common things," a heavily filtered, hypermoody selfie-lifestyle confluence. He takes Adrianne Ho's Instagram account as its apotheosis, and it's no coincidence that Ho's is a sponsored feed, tied to the clothes she's given to model.
I've been aware of a profusion of variously branded content on Instagram for a while now, a result of friends working in the lifestyle publishing world — food, in particular, is a good way to see how this, pardon the pun, sausage is made. Brand diffusion on Instagram takes different forms. There is that which is obviously sponsored, as in paid (to the social network) ads that pop into feeds, or clearly demarcated sponsored 'editorial content' with brand @ing on 'independent' accounts. There is also a shadow economy of soft sponsorship by way of freebies then imaged by trusted native accounts. What Ryder is thinking about is what I see on a daily basis.
One reason that Instagram is so fertile for both styles of advertising is that its discoverability is so horrible — like its owner, Facebook, Instagram closes your feed in on itself, with very little invitation to explore different Instagram experiences, different Instagram worlds, different people. The Explore tab used to filter in all sorts of weird images that were trending, but as of late last year, it now displays things your friends are liking. Vine — wonderful, amazing Vine — in contrast, is all about discoverability, randomness, and blur... [emphasis added]
In her Frieze review [sign-in required], Karen Archey doesn't think that Adrianne Ho's Instagram is a form of commercial debasement, but states, rather, that the model's use of her body gives her "power." Instead of a comment on Instagram "sausage-making," she sees Ripps' work as simple misogyny:
In one painting, [the model's] nose becomes bulbous to the point of disfiguration (Nose Reflection, all works 2014); in another, her face is compressed into an alien-like arrangement (Mona Lisa); an additional work shrinks her waist to a spine’s width (Hourglass). This, of course, is a pointed thing to do to an image of a woman whose power hinges on her body’s appearance and her control over it.
The affront to Adrianne Ho is so extreme, Archey believes, that these paintings deserve to be "censured":
Some male artists, curators and writers seem to think that if they put something that is inadvertently misogynist into the world with purportedly good intentions, they shouldn’t be publicly censured in the name of free speech. If they feel that women demanding to be treated with respect tramples on their rights, maybe privilege has become so entrenched with identity that it has become blinding.
Well, is it inadvertent or not? No sense in asking -- by the end of her review, Archey's outrage has mounted to the point that she might as well be writing in capslock:
The most upsetting aspect of this situation is that a male artist was afforded the opportunity to mount such a misogynistic exhibition at a highly respected Manhattan gallery.
Here's hoping Archey never sees a George Condo show (which happen with some regularity in highly respected Manhattan galleries) -- she's going to be even more upset. Her Ripps review cribs arguments from Paddy Johnson's writings, which were already set at "10" on the bluster scale, and dials them up to "11." Is this necessary? You wonder if they even edit at Frieze, or if they just convert the capitals to lower case and send a thank-you email to the writer.
Photos taken with "dumb phone" at the New Museum Triennial (with checklist details):
Tanya Perez Cordova, meeting a stranger, afternoon, cafes, 2014, fired terracotta and borrowed SIM card
Tanya Perez Cordova, chasing, pausing, waiting, 2014, makeup (blush), bird droppings, cigarette ash, black marble
The "borrowed SIM card" isn't visible in the top photo but it's an elegant little mini-abstraction in a bluntly handmade wall-sculpture. The marble piece below also possesses a delicacy that's missing in these grainy photos.
If you DuckDuckGo the words "sim card" and select images, you can sort of fill in a missing detail from the top work. "Sort of" because the cards have different designs and I can't vouch that any of these is the one in Cordova's sculpture. Cordova's card had very little surrounding plastic, no bright colors, and my recollection is the chip pattern was simpler even than any of these designs. Possibly it was a micro-SIM card? If you DuckDuckGo "sim chip" you get mostly the same images but there are some examples of people cutting down the size of cards to make micro-cards.
Despite its lumpy, scalloped outlines, the sculpture itself has a machinelike quality. The groove in which the SIM card rests appears "slotted," as if to receive the card. Terracotta is a building material but also a primordial art material: the orange slab suggests a primitive tablet with the SIM card incorporated as a form of writing. Lots of dystopian science fiction ideas here: it's an earnest parody of a phone or ID card in a postapocalyptic culture, a mysterious future-retro tchotchke in a society more advanced than our own, or an elaborate display in a present-day cargo cult that revels in technological fragments. Or a standard minimal-style sculpture in a "future"-focused New York museum show that will be given a passing glance by most museumgoers, and possibly converted to attractive blog content!
periodically I get the itch to print out my "net art"
hat tips noisia (who made the web app) and D_MAGIK
also, Santiago Calatrava, whose sucky ornamental winged thing will soon be gracing the revamped World Trade Center's "transit hub."
It looks kind of like the design above but with "wings" that are awkwardly asymmetrical and jammed too close to an adjacent building.
hat tip gr8previne
No idea what's actually going on here but this reminds me of Ender's Game (the book) where two kids change world opinion using "the internet."