http://www.blogto.com/feed/recentcomments/?563 Comments recently made in this post on blogTO Copyright 2009 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:33:25 PST http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c463270 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c463270 Toronto, Arts Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:07:26 PST http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c229955 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c229955 Toronto, Arts Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:40:09 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c782 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c782 Toronto, Arts Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:26:22 PDT >TC seems to be really bugged and >>irriated by art, but at the same >>time he can't seem to turn away from >>it. That very much describes my sentiment. Everybody in the art world seems to play the mad game at speculating the highest value possible for any art (both critical and material), while I prefer think from the opposite: deppreciate art to its minimum value and see what is left. The funny thing is that I seem to share a lot of opinions about the artworld with Timothy but we seem to have very different opinions about what consist of good art. Here: Tmothy: >>>>because if artists are the ones >>>>society trains to be creative, >>>they're wasting everyone's time >>>>with these installations." Lol ! I loveeeee installation art ! I think it is still the most daring thing to do because gallerists are so product oriented and installations are so hard to sell. I don't find painting daring because it never stopped filling the galleries, really. It did only in Canada art centres. Some artists spoil their art from doing product instead of installations. I'll tell you when I spot one. Well, ok....Jennifer Steinkamp's last show was video projections on walls presented as different pieces while she should focus on installation work. (Why ? Cos showing cuts of moving digital flowers spread here and there across the gallery space looked way too fragmented, when the first thing that strikes you when you enter the gallery is how everything hold and move together. But....gallery needs to sell....artist do sellable pieces.. and kills her art in the process...thanks to the gallerist for NOT helping her by suggesting to NOT focus on product..) Jenny: >>>Why should Daniel Hughes want to be >>>in the same boat with a critic So he can take a shotgun and shoot at the bottom so that they both sink ? I agree with Timothy that a bad review at the least forces the artist to face reaction, and that his art doesn't belong to him anymore. Too many artists exhibit thinking their art belongs to them. Whatever security guards you post defending people to take pictures, your audience is still recording a picture...in their mind. And the hope for artists seems to relay on that fact that mind recording is numbing, so that they can get away with "their" art. But...not. Your art doesn't belong to you anymore. I pictured it. I transformed it. I can thrash it or reconstruct it into something else. I can take influence from it, I can pay homage to it, I can destroy it. I can also show you how much indifference I got from it. The bad thing for artists is being in this position when your art is neither bad nor good enough to stimulate commentary. I can only hope that Timothy really hated Daniel's art. Cheers, Cedric Caspesyan centiment@hotmail.com ]]> http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c741 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c741 Toronto, Arts Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:19:09 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c724 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c724 Toronto, Arts Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:47:25 PDT Does all criticism have to be generous? First of all let me clarify once again. I have no problem with the statement of a substantiated negative critical position. That means stating what's bugging you about the art and why plus a couple more reasons wouldn't hurt. Isit not generous to reckon with the objects with which you find fault, to craft your argument with the skill and attention you find lacking? Is it really very generous and (you acknowledged as much) to say you were distracted but yet somehow bored by the work? How generous is it to be reminded of theory in spite of not really looking at the paintings much less attempt to let readers in on what you saw? How generous is it to provide as your only visual aid to the exhibition, it's ripped and folded invite when a pristine jpeg will arrive on your email within minutes of your request to the professionals at the gallery? Artists and artwriters are under pressure from a we're-all-in-the-same-boat syndrome, where its seen a betrayal of the tribe if you speak out against any aspect of it. We are? Hahahah! So speak up. Make it stick. Why should Daniel Hughes want to be in the same boat with a critic who was bored by his paintings but couldn't say why? ]]> http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c718 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c718 Toronto, Arts Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:05:11 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c716 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c716 Toronto, Arts Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:38:56 PDT I say thank goodness for curmudgeons, so somebody writes something negative about some art once in a while....if we ask for more from culture we just might get it. I couldn't agree with you more. But proclaiming some artwork boring without substantiating one's claims asks nothing of culture. Whatever you ask of culture - it seems like a responsibility to hold your critical rhetoric to the same standard. No? I don't think you'd have bothered to write about this show without Timothy's challenge... Absolutely right again, but Timothy's challenge is in response to my questions above - which he still hasn't really addressed. And it's too bad 'cause there's lots of fodder for a real discussion. This descriptive role for art reviews may be kind of boring for artwriters (I know I'd always prefer to spout off on a theoretical tangent of some kind) but is highly valued by readers. Description is indispensible. Describing the work proves you were there especially if you're then going to ask readers to go read whole essays by Kuspit (instead of weaving salient points through your text) it provides a ballast. a too-cool-for-school dude hanging out at an opening of an artist who's work he doesn't respect.... Ah respect. In his review of a talk given recently John Raulston Saul, Timothy speaks of a "... lingering bitterness (he has) toward the artworld in which (he's) immersed: because if artists are the ones society trains to be creative, they're wasting everyone's time with these installations." I have to confess this statement resonated (for me) as a a kind of antipathy that's not necessarily conducive to generosity in criticism. And it returns me to my question - if it's all crap why bother? ]]> http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c715 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c715 Toronto, Arts Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:20:14 PDT
I get in trouble for the opposite all the time: I"m always trying to squeeze some nugget of value out of basically lame and crappy art. I think my motivation is the same as writing a negative review: "Come on people, there's got to be more to it than this!"

J. I like your review (nice writing chops you got, gal), but I don't think you'd have bothered to write about this show without Timothy's challenge, and your struggle to find something interesting to talk about shows through.

I didn't see the show and Jennifer's review gives me a much better mental picture of what it looked like than Timothy's review. This descriptive role for art reviews may be kind of boring for artwriters (I know I'd always prefer to spout off on a theoretical tangent of some kind) but is highly valued by readers.

Also, much as I enjoy Timothy's ongoing irreverent stance, the scenario he depicts of a too-cool-for-school dude hanging out at an opening of an artist who's work he doesn't respect as a means of chatting up a so called "girl"—while sadly a true enough picture of urban cultural reality—is kind of tawdry and deppressing. ]]> http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c702 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c702 Toronto, Arts Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:16:26 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c660 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c660 Toronto, Arts Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:15:11 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c642 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c642 Toronto, Arts Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:33:41 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c630 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c630 Toronto, Arts Thu, 09 Jun 2005 11:07:48 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c629 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c629 Toronto, Arts Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:34:23 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c620 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c620 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 16:58:34 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c619 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c619 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 14:08:05 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c618 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c618 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 13:36:35 PDT What do I need to describe about 'Skulls, self-portraits, business men on stairs'? I guess I was thinking more about the people who read your review (who may or may not have seen the show) and their need to understand the representational/painterly qualities of the works in question. Skulls, self portraits and businessmen on stairs register only generic subject matter. I was also thinking how great it would be to see a critical position supported by the writing about the work itself. And I was thinking that artists deserve more considered, generous and less contemptuous treatment of their work. Or would you yourself be satisfied with a review of your work that was as disdainful as what you have written here? ]]> http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c617 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c617 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 13:17:49 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c614 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c614 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 12:06:46 PDT http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c609 http://www.blogto.com/arts/2005/06/queen_streets_new_old_masters/#c609 Toronto, Arts Wed, 08 Jun 2005 09:50:07 PDT