December 24, 2005
December 23, 2005
December 22, 2005
Untitled 18 (for A.M., December 22)
| |
Untitled (for A.M., December 22), 2005, HTML, 459 x 242 pixels
December 21, 2005
Untitled 17 (Solstice)
|
Untitled (Solstice), 2005, HTML, 503 x 273 pixels
Notes on Laurie Reid at Gallery Joe (revised)
I ran into someone the other day who told me that s/he had read and enjoyed what I wrote recently about Laurie Reid. It kind of jolted me- you mean people actually read these things? So I reread it myself and decided it needed a few small adjustments. Here it is revised.
Four watercolors by Laurie Reid, all push pinned to the wall. See better photos on her page at Gallery Joe.
I know Laurie Reid's work very well, having had many opportunities to see it in the Bay Area. Her most recent exhibit at Stephen Wirtz Gallery in San Francisco just closed earlier this month, and I just recently saw her work in Water Color: Current Views at Gallery Joe in Philadelphia. Her past work is all watercolor on paper. Often the watercolor is heavily diluted and applied so that the paper buckles and the pigment collects along the edges of the liquid as it sits in the furrows of the buckled paper. Other work is made of various sized drops of much more intense color.
Reid's work doesn't allow for much correction, and requires concentration and a strong physical presence: action, balance, and decisiveness. Recent work seems to begin by re-using older work on top of which new painting takes place. This introduces a few things: multiple kinds of linear and solid structures, greater variety of line, much greater varying of density of color used within one painting, and layering of kinds of structures over other kinds.
This newer work looks more relaxed. Part of that I think comes from the re-use of old work, and from the second-generation of new marks covering or laying over a first generation of older marks. In a way it is destroying old work to make new work, or adding to something that one decides much later is unfinished. I think to do that one does have to be relaxed, to have accepted something as incomplete or perhaps a failure. That requires a letting go, and approaching an old work with a new attitude.
I see in the older work an interesting contradiction or duality— these very liquid lines carry a lot of tension and at the same time a sense of relaxed flow. Let me describe this tension and relaxation.
First, there's a lot of tension in the lines and drops— that comes from the precision, calculation, measuring, and consistency needed to make the work, the need not to screw up, and the difficulty imposed by not being able to do anything over. As a viewer, one feels all of that. Tension in many of the larger works, some up to six feet or more high or long, is found, for example, in the long strokes that need to cover a very large area. And there is also tension in the relationship of one line or shape to another, in how they may be placed alongside each other and not touch, each retaining a unique quality. This all requires strength, endurance, a steady hand and eye, care and patience. Part of the tension is of course is built into the medium of water on paper— you've pretty much got to hit it in one go without correction when you're working with large sheets of nice white paper and each large wet stroke is the image. Reid handles that really well, with strength and consistency.
But then all the tension in the lines (or, lines so fat they become shapes) is contradicted by their liquid quality— the somewhat controlled elastic flow of pigment within puddled sections— and by the physical puckering of the paper. This liquidity and puckering creates a feeling of relaxation, of breathing, and expansiveness.
I find that duality between tension and relaxed flow really interesting; it is very human, almost figurative— something with a nervous system opened up and laid bare. There is a tremulousness to the images, and if one is quiet and listens there is a hum, either off the work or in the viewer's response to the work.
In the newer work Reid is building webs with new lines on top of old, or filling in shapes with new areas color that were previously only defined by line. This changes the whole dynamic in Reid's work; this new work is more layered, with one approach on top of another approach. Because of this the work feels less process-oriented — less conceptual— and more like someone building a picture. In a sense, the correction she couldn't do on the earlier work is now taking place in the newer work, and old is transformed into new. The tensions have changed a bit, and there is a newer density and heaviness.
All of the work I saw at Gallery Joe is in this new same vein as the work in the Wirtz show. I think this direction adds another dimension to Reid's work, and certainly give here something new to wrestle with. I hope she can hold onto the qualities I admire in the older work while adding new approaches. This recent work is a good start.
Chris Ashley
Oakland, CA 2005
Works on paper
There is now a page linked under Archives by Category on the left nav bar that is a catalogue of all works on paper posted to this weblog.
 |  |  |
 |  |
Chimney Rock 1-5, 2005 (August), Pencil, watercolor & ink on paper, approx. 8.75 x 6.75" each (scanned)
We provide a team of qualified posters...
Sally McKay posts on her weblog the following genuine business proposition she received:
"We provide a team of qualified posters to post new topics or replies on your forum, message board or community. Our posters are selected in regards to your specifications. Our deep and diversified team allows us to provide you with posters who have a genuine interest with your website’s topic. They will join your forum and interact with your members, hence stimulating discussions and enhancing interest on your boards."
And the ensuing discussion comprising twenty eight posts are hilarious. A sampling:
whats next, a protection racket where you pay not to get flamed?- anonymous (guest) 12-20-2005 6:25 pm
Hello, Miss Sally, my name is Sanjay, and I am finding your forum, http://www.digitalmediatree.com/sallymckay/, to be most stimulating. I am finding your pixels to be so very aesthetically pleasing. I expect to be returning often to enjoy the community.
- Sanjay (guest) 12-21-2005 9:35 am
Thanks Sanjay. I am engaged by the deep and diversified interest you have shown in the topic of my website!
- sally mckay 12-21-2005 9:46 am
Sanjay, dude, quit being such a suck up. Your verisimilitude is totally lacking, bro! And anyway, aren't you supposed to be pretending to be a Canadian for this gig? You're supposed to say "aboot" and "eh". Read the style guide, you hoser.
[998 posts remaining in Classic plan.]- skyler (guest) 12-21-2005 9:48 am
My verisimilitude! You are totally blowing my cover Mr. Skyler dude. Oh why did I ever quit my job at the data center? Sure it was boring dealing with the same stupid user errors over and over again, but at least I was being true to myself. I am so sorry, Sally. I will regain my composure and resume making cogent comments about your pixels.
- sanjay (guest) 12-21-2005 9:52 am
Tyler Green on Kenneth Baker
In a post yesterday about the alleged sad state of visual arts criticism that begins by mentioning Jerry Saltz's recent piece in the Village Voice, Seeing Out Loud, Tyler Green wrote, while also mentioning other critics writing for big dailies, "In the San Francisco Chronicle Kenneth Baker has the title "art critic" but mostly writes short features and newsy notebooks -- nary an opinion to be found."
To which I replied in an email to him:
The "SFGate Culture Blog/Art" that you link to from your weblog more accurately fits your assessment above. More specifically, Matt Perry's contributions regarding the visual arts are little more than PR and gossip, all written in the first person, very social-scenish. Beyond the simple information provided it is critically useless.I have no reason to defend Baker, and am annoyed by the Chronicles lack of comprehensive visual arts coverage- as you know, Baker is the only art critic published in the daily, typically once a week. Other writers occasionally do feature-like personality pieces about artists that are amazingly clueless about visual art.
But do you actually read Baker every Saturday? In fact, his writing is often much more analytical and incisive than you are giving him credit for, and although he usually refrains from giving a thumbs up or down he does write critically. It is common for his writing to set work in a historical, social, and political context, describes and models how looking at, seeing, and experiencing the work is where much meaning comes from, explains meanings inherent in specific media, and often finds critical connections, overlays, or disjunctions between media (an obvious example: the "battle" between painting and photography). And given the space that he seems to be allotted in the paper he manages to pack a fair amount of information into some very dense, concise paragraphs. You may not like his writing or his style, and you may be unhappy with the small amount of coverage the Bay Area scene gets, but your claim that "he mostly writes short features and newsy notebooks" is just plain wrong.
And when Baker does express a black or white opinion he is quite clear. Here, for example, is an atypically short review published Saturday, April 2, 2005 for show at Cheryl Haines Gallery in SF:
"New York painter Max Gimblett occupies most of the space at Haines with fastidiously made but utterly lifeless paintings. One dazzling Turrell hologram, hung near the "Magnatron," outshines them all."
Tyler Green writes Modern Art Notes and was the art critic for Bloomberg News from September, 2004 until September, 2005 (actually, I didn't know that he no longer had this position). He is also occasionally published in other papers, such as the Wall Street Journal.
A higher standard of good art criticism is something more than expressing strong opinions. I think it is something closer to what I describe Baker doing, regardless of whether or not one thinks he does it well.
Frankly, I think it's bad form, even unbecoming, to bash peers, especially when, based on my reading and in my opinion, the bashing seems uninformed, and it's unclear whether or not the basher (Green) actually has and meets a higher standard of criticism.
In late December Baker wrote a fine piece about "Visual Politics: The Art of Engagement" at the San Jose Museum of Art. Recently he wrote a feature about Chuck Close and his show of self portraits in various media at SFMoMA that is not really criticism but explores Close's oeurve with a historical and critical eye. I could point to lots more.
Incidentally, for another fine example of art criticism read Christopher Knight's terrific piece Image and object about Robert Rauschenberg: Combines that just opened at the Met in NY, or A new view of an artistic revolution about Van Gogh's drawings, also at the Met.
December 20, 2005
December 19, 2005
Jon Manteau: Part 2 video
Vince Romaniello has posted Part 2 of his video about Phildaelphia painter Jon Manteau.
Joanne Mattera on Miami
Joanne Mattera emails a long report about her trip to Miami art fairs.
Never mind that the crowd came three weeks before the winter solstice, this was Spring Break for artists and collectors. I saw much of Manhattan in Miami. (And there were so many art people from so many places, I’m sure the same experience was being repeated for folks from Chicago or Akron or, for that matter, Montevideo). You couldn’t walk 10 feet without running into, and chatting with, or end up going to dinner with, someone you knew. The atmosphere was festive, but make no mistake: It was all about the benjamins. The dealers were there to sell, sell, sell, and the collectors to buy, buy, buy. The reporters, curators, critics and artists were there to connect their various dots. Except for the booth-bound dealers who appeared to get paler by the day, everyone else seemed to be having a good time.
And, while I have your attention:
Joanne Mattera, Uttar 267, Encaustic on panel, 36 x 36", 2004