CUE Foundation booth

Lastly, I want to thank the great people at the CUE Art Foundation for this opportunity. I stopped by the CUE booth on Sunday and talked with Jeremy Adams and Talia Spetter. Here is a photo of the CUE booth. It seemed less commercial than most of the booths in its presentation with the display of an eclectic group of artists. Hopefully, it ended up being a great venue for them to promote the artists that they have worked with. According to Jeremy, Artropolis was very generous with CUE, giving them a reasonable not-for-profit rate. They also worked with them to present a performance piece with Chicago-based CUE grantee Cupola Bobber www.cupolabobber.com,
that didn't work out due to space constraints. The most interesting aspect of talking with Jeremy was that he said that CUE was able to pay for a booth, ship and insure works of art to adorn said booth, fly two people to Chicago from New York, and put them up for three nights for less than a booth fee at fairs in New York. As he also said, "Art fairs are here to stay." Most of the comments I've heard from dealers, artists, gallery owners and visitors seemed to echo this sentiment. I myself found it to be a good venue to see work from emerging artists around the world, although not a venue to really experience experimental work, but certainly an exhausting and over-stimulating experience. I have enjoyed blogging about it though.

"Social Activist" work at Art Chicago???

"Partisan Expressions Of Our Time"--did anyone know about this exhibition within Art Chicago? No, I don't think that they did. Two of the volunteers I asked about it had no clue; one said that I was the first to ask about it and suggested that I go to 12th floor NE. Luckily for me she was right. It was located in the corner, near one of the cafes. "Partisan" is, according to the Artropolis brochure,

"A special exhibition designed to accelerate the rate at which fine artists express the ideas and emotions to influence other artistic mediums and ultimately social and political viewpoints. "Partisan" is curated and juried by prominent artists from a range of fields who are known for their social activism."


So here are two images from "Partisan," the bottom image is by Renee Cox and is called Liberation of Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben (1998). The top image is Guma Guar's You Are All Faggots from 2006 (sorry it only imports horizontally).




















I'm not sure who the jurors were as I don't think they were listed, but the advisory panel included the actor Martin Sheen, musician Jeff Tweedy, Lin Brehmer (possibly a Chicago-based morning radio host), and Father Andrew Greeley (i think a progressive catholic priest in oak park). Martin Sheen gets out there and protests and gets arrested. He has credibility in this sense. This exhibition seems to be an honest attempt to represent this kind of work. Yet, I was dumbfounded at its exhibition within Artropolis. What purpose can it serve here, next to the food court? If you were a visitor to the art fair would you notice these works or walk right past them?

It is interesting that this exhibition is included; I'm not sure if its inclusion is a good thing. On one hand, if Artropolis is presenting a selection of contemporary and modern work from around the world, shouldn't this kind of work have some visibility also? Hasn't the criticism within social activist circles been that this kind of work doesn't get play within mainstream venues? So then, isn't it good to get the word out to a mass audience? And, while most of this work is overly didactic, it is critical of, and sheds light upon certain policies, attitudes, and modes of behavior that permeate the way that we live. It is confrontational in a sense--messing around with popes can still be pretty scandalous--and has the possibility of offending someone, if they happen to accidentally come face-to-face with it, so it's not like these works are safe attempts at social activist art. So, why am i bothered by their inclusion?

First of all, I think that the most interesting "social activist" work being created is not object-based, it is experience, project, or community-based (here I simplify). The work on display is easily digestible; images that are easily marketable. Most importantly they are "social activist" work in a commercially-viable form. Indeed, the label for Guar's work refers the viewer to a booth in NEXT where I assume that it may be purchased. In contrast, the most interesting work of this kind that I know of is complex, not available in an easily understood image. The work on display at Art Chicago seems, well, a bit dated to me in its approach.

Last year at Artropolis there were a host of events that included artists, designers, and curators talking about social activism and art. Yet, for people interested in that kind of work it seemed odd in such a highly commercial entity. I remember Mary Patten, a School of the Art Institute of Chicago professor, and member of ACT-UP, whose work deals, in part, with prisons and prisoners rights, speaking on a panel at Artropolis whose theme I forget now. She mentioned that she felt so weird being on that panel and in that commercial space because her work generally operated away from those interests. And, indeed, for me as an audience member I felt out of place too because the reasons for making social activist art are supposed to be more detached from the buy-sell mentality of commercial art. Yet, I think that this is probably a simplified view of how the art world works. Artists need to be able to eat, pay rent, buy supplies, travel--even those that create work that is engaged with a social agenda. How do they do this if they don't have family money, grant money, a teaching gig/s or some other source of income? Art fairs are incredible opportunities for exposure for artists who must constantly market themselves, and i suppose, they are a great way to network too. Can they serve a purpose for artists interested in social activism?

Art fairs are straight-up commercial venues. I don't know about other fairs, but Art Chicago and NEXT seemed to at least include some work that may be more esoteric or less-commercially friendly, and seemed at least conscious of including more non-traditional art making practices. But maybe Art Fairs really aren't a proper venue for this kind of work. I think perhaps not, if the ultimate goal is to sell work. It just seems like a misplaced gesture. Perhaps a separate exhibition or project away from the Merchandise Mart would be a better solution? I also think that tapping in to the community here in Chicago who practices this kind of art would be helpful too. But I think that a social and political agenda gets lost in the vast space of the Mart with "16,000 pieces of artwork displayed by 780 exhibitors from 242 cities and 28 countries at five concurrent shows under one roof" (from Christopher G. Kennedy's welcome in the Artropolis brochure). It is an innappropriate venue for work that strives for something beyond commercial viability.

Tim Roda

Tim Roda’s work was not the most spectacular; the work is too intimate for that. How could it compete with a slowed down car crash with broken glass and smashed metal? But Roda’s work is some of the most humane at NEXT.

The black and white photographs evoke classical and popular mythology—Icarus, doppelgangers, boxing kangaroos each find their way to the surface. The man and boy (prominent in most of the images) interact in various ways. The boy, always helpful, seems to be a genius, a spirit aiding the man in his follies. 

 The boy does not judge the man; the boy aids him (sometimes with only a hint of apprehension) as he tries to exert control over their detritus filled world. The attention to the world of decay spills into ours as a cardboard covering spills across the floor of the Art Agents space.

artists of interest in the NEXT Fair

Here, briefly, are some works that I thought were interesting in the NEXT fair:

Christine Tarkowski's installation. I saw her work towards the end of my visit on Sunday and there was not enough time to take it in so I can't really comment on it in a sufficient manner, but it was enough to make me want to know more about this Chicago-based artist. Above is a photo from the fair and below is a link to her work on the Priska C. Juschka Fine Art website: www.priskajuschkafineart.com/artists/Christine_Tarkowski/statement.php



The Chadwicks (J. Blachly and L. Shaw): The Golden Age Micro Brewery at Winkleman Gallery
(image to the right). I'm not really sure how this work is used--as a prop for performance, photography, or installation (or perhaps all of those things). There is a funny photocopied pamphlet that accompanies this structure that looks like one of those roving puppet carts that one sees on the street (although inside of the pamphlet the viewer is playfully chastised for not being able to distinguish this model from those puppet carts). Below is a link to the gallery owner's blog. The gallery site doesn't mention the Chadwicks. www.edwardwinkleman.blogspot.com/2008/04/forecast-windy-with-chance-of-high.html.

Paul Shambroom's work addresses structures of power. Shambroom is a Minneapolis-based artist. He had a fabulous show awhile back at Chicago's Museum of Contemporary Photography of his series "Meetings". At NEXT I believe he was showing in the Kavi Gupta booth. The photograph displayed at NEXT is part of his current project "Security" which documents, according to Shambroom's website, "official U.S. government preparedness and training in the aftermath of 9/11. Here is a link to Paul's website to view his work: www.paulshambroomart.com





Also of interest were a set of three photographs by Joao Paedro Santos. Interiors lit by some kind of fluorescent lighting system that are present in the works. Really beautiful and mesmerizing. I zoned out on finding his gallery representation.

















Lastly, I really loved this piece by Kristof Kintera at the Jiri Svestka Gallery in Prague www.jirisvestka.com. Simple execution; a great sound piece. The gallery director said that the piece had to be changed for the states as the discharge in Europe put out 50,000 volts, but the electrical wiring here would only put out 25,000 volts. He said it was still dangerous anyway. Here is a poorly documented video of the work:

Panel on Chicago Galleries

Art Chicago Speaks
1960 to the Present:
The History of Chicago Galleries
Sponsored by the Art Dealers Association of Chicago

Moderated by Natalie van Straaten
Panelists included:
Richard Gray, Richard Gray Gallery www.richardgraygallery.com
Catherine Edelman, Catherine Edelman Gallery www.edelmangallery.com
Carrie Secrist, Carrie Secrist Gallery www.secristgallery.com
David Klamen (artist) represented by Richard Gray Gallery www.richardgraygallery.com


This panel gave an overview of the gallery scene in Chicago and the panelists talked honestly and openly about their experiences. According to Richard Gray when he decided to open his own gallery on East Ontario in the 1950s, there existed a very small gallery scene. Galleries at that time could be “counted on one-and-a-half hands” and were centered on Michigan Avenue and Ontario. Chicago now has a scene that is well respected and thriving. Some highlights of the panel are listed below:

• All three dealers began their careers as artists and in some ways fell into their current role.
  
• In response to the question of their role locally, they all believe that to survive in the art market they should be engaged with the art world in a more expansive and global manner as part of a larger community. As Gray said, he “never believed that the art world was local.” It required a “much more universal you.”
• 75% of both Gray and Edelman’s sales were from out-of-state collectors; Edelman said that with the exception of New York, she found that sales for dealers in other states was also from 75% out-of-state purchases. Klamen said that he sells most of his work to collectors elsewhere.
  
• The panelists agreed that for collectors there is a cache to purchasing work in New York, even if they may buy work for cheaper elsewhere.
• The internet is the future for galleries—Edelman said that 90% of her sales are driven by it.
• Everyone agreed that in Chicago there is a unique collegiality amongst gallery owners that does not exist elsewhere. Secrist said that galleries in Chicago do not compete for artists.
• Gray, Edelman, and Secrist agreed that there is no collegiality between art institutions and local dealers. Very rarely do curators or directors sit down with local gallerists to look for artists or works or visit their galleries.
• On the topic of art fairs, Secrist said that they are a “terrific opportunity to travel the world, a one-stop-shopping experience”…but that they are affecting artists by taking attention and time away from exhibition and project development. She also expressed a concern that auction houses were taking over the functions that art fairs had absorbed and that “more and more [the art world] is about commerce.” Klamen said that art fairs may “make artists feel minuscule in comparison to the world art scene” but they are a remarkable venue to see work from around the world.
• Another topic broached was the lack of local press for art venues. Secrist said that the Chicago Tribune told her that if she advertised more that her exhibitions would be reviewed more. She said that this is a problem with national and international publications also—“if you pay for things, you get them.”
• Edelman said that galleries are businesses. The possibility of the upcoming recession will negatively affect her business but she, like many other gallery owners, will survive because they have been through periods of economic downturn before and know how to weather these changes
  

Two Textiles

Although I know it isn’t so, the word textile connotes a daintiness. Saying that word, we can imagine how our manly precursors could dismiss with snort these “womanly arts” or with a simple cough “craft.” But oh, this connotation is not so.

 Piercing tissue, cutting fabric, tearing seams give these works an underlying violence. Two pieces, Ian Cooper’s “Aren’t You” at the Cue space and Kimberely Hart’s “”Whimper” at Mixed Greens, reveal this inherent violence.

 

Cooper’s “Aren’t You” is faux violence and teddy bear horror. It is a delightful monstrosity echoing horror movies and urban legends. But the softness of the material softens the horror, but in doing so makes it more horrible. Felt “blood” letters seem to make us accept the implied physical violence. Just as the mirrored denim fails to reflect the red felt blurs fails to horrify. And we become complicit and eager to accept a certain darkness.

 

 

Hart’s needlepoint “Whimper” has the double threat of antique femininity and violence. The limp, broken rabbit and the fluid and dynamic blood pool-dynamic are more insistent in our acknowledging the violence. The needlepoint seems to push the violence further into the imagined past. But the presence of the carcass, instead of just the traces in the image, gives us the immediacy of pathos instead of energetic plush fabrication.

I feel bad

Today I went to NEXT, Art Chicago, and The Artist Project, and I still need to go back to see more, because there's so much. And that's my point. I think there is too much under one roof, and people might feel overwhelmed and even get desensitized to all the art. I saw the shows I was interested in, but there's also Intuit and the Antiques Fair. Imagine how the people who want to go to all of Artopolis feel: I'm sure they've passed out by now.

I talked briefly with Nicholas Sistler (whose work I recommend--he's in The Artist Project, booth 8-3118) and he said there are a lot of visitors, which is good, but the main complaint from the participants is that there is too much there. I think a booth at The Artist Project is a couple thousand dollars, so unless someone has lots of contacts, it would be hard to break even.

Of course, art is a tough business, but I feel bad for the artists because even if they don't "have" to sell their work and just want to get exposure, the viewers' experience could become numb, dulled, and diluted to the point where it all runs together, and they won't notice what makes people's hard work special.

~Margaret L

Recurrent Themes

After I had wandered through NEXT, I realized certain images/themes seemed prominent. Looking through my notes, I must have felt ambivalent about most of the work that fell into these themes since I have little additional information. But I think it is worthwhile at least to note these streams of thought.

 

1) Skulls/Skeletal Figurations: If you’re not sure a work is working, just throw a skull in the corner. It’ll be fine. Or maybe just cut the canvas and stick a bone through it. I wonder if this is a reaction to Hirst’s “For the Love of God” or perhaps the general mortal vibe cast by skeletons on hip hoodies and T-shirts from Urban Outfitters and Threadless. (I actually own one of those shirts.)

 

2) Animal Hybrids/ Animals Not Behaving Normally: Depictions of birds, rabbits and sharks seem to be well represented. Shark girls, teddy bear battles, rabbits that have been brutalized or are about to brutalize come readily to mind. Kimberley Hart at Mixed Greens had the most interesting rabbit, but I’ll talk about that in another post.

 

3) Changing Text: Installations that have text that rewrites itself are strewn throughout the space from the student to the professional precincts. These range from small salvaged LED screens to intricate vacuum molded sculptures that serve as screens for animation of gears and text.

 

4) Americana: Maybe because we are in the Land of Lincoln, maybe because our national hopes and frustrations feel so palpable, the Great Debater has a presence here. But the Americana is not limited to this figure, flags, queer revisions of ethnographic images of Indians and other odd interpretations of the American past are present.

Striking!

Go to Kaune, Sudendorf (booth 7-3130) and check out Marina Gadonneix. Her "Remote Control" series is striking, and it shows what we all want to say. It was hard for me to move on, and I'll probably go back there today. It's aesthetically pleasing and interesting, and it's bold.

~Margaret L

Behind the Scenes

The "Behind the Scenes: Curators on Curating" panel offered many ingenious insights to help provide a wider context for contemporary institutional practice. These insights ranged from “the basketball hoop is a signifier for basketball” to the more practical and engaged discussion of how organizations deal with unsolicited portfolios/project submissions.

 

Dominic Molon led Romi Crawford, Merrill Falkenberg, Claire Tancons, and Joan Young through a conversation on the transforming relationship between curator and artist in the gallery and the museum space. The emerging paradigm of established and mid-career artists exerting control over how their works are shown is exemplified in that some artists are asking that space be given to other artists in their shows. (This of course is related to the subtext of the conversation, which was the iteration and reiteration of the importance of networking.)

 

In contrast, the specter of theme shows evoked an understanding that these types of exhibitions could bring in a broader audience but came with the risk of watering down the complexity of the work in favor of an easily digestible theme. In a similar vein, each panelist dealt with varying levels of bemusement as they confronted the ideas of community involvement since their respective organizations deal with the balance of local, national and international constituencies in their audience.

 

The most interesting issue (and clearly frustrating to the panelists) was the question of the unsolicited portfolio or proposal.  The frustration stemmed not so much from the fact these materials were submitted, but because of the volume of submissions, the machinery of the institutions had no way of adequately dealing with them. Institutional response ranges from a limited one-month review period to more ambiguous dismay.

 

Claire Tancons mentioned that she had recently started working with an unsolicited proposal. But most fell back, admitting that new work is brought to their attention by someone they know and trust. Molon offered the salient advice to young artists that they had to get their work out into the world (in smaller venues so that they might become familiar to people who make decisions about larger venues.) He offered these words of pragmatic generosity to the many young people in the room with a palpable sensitivity to their concerns.

 

It was a gift that I hope was well received. (I know it is advice I will re-gift to studio majors who wander into my lit classes.)