Sunday, February 27, 2005

Riopelle In New York

Riopelle will have a show in New York at
Robert Miller Gallery,
from March 31 to April 30 2005.

Isn't that fantastic?


Problem is that all his best paintings I'm sure are already sold
since a while, so if the americans wish to see one of the best early
abstract expressionists ever, they're gonna have to wait that a museum
"indulge" into setting up some kind of event, at least a group show
about the Automatists.


Speaking of Robert Miller, there was another "Category A" show there
recently that I didn't mention yesterday and which was a collectiv
assemblage called "Almost".

I wasn't always convinced by the pertinency of the works selected, judging
from the light of the curatorial statement, but most of it was really neat,
and extremely varied in style and approach. I like exhibits that show art for
every taste.


I may come back to this one.


---------------------------------------------


I was at Nuit Blanche yesterday, and my goal forthe week is trying to decorticate what was art from the "Sphere Loto-Québec", from what wasn't.


Because let's face it, as a physical entity it surpassed a lot of your average balloon art (insert here the link to Christo's baloon column but I lost it..;-P...).



Cheers,

Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com

Saturday, February 26, 2005

Back From The USSA

Ok...Back in Montreal, just in time to
reach Nuit Blanche (White Night), an overnight of activities including a fair share of an art related programmation.




I saw between 60 and 70 shows in the last week, which is slightly less than usual
(I usually cross the boundary of 80), which is partly due because of many hours spent walking around the Christo work (I returned 3 times: normal day, wet day, snow day), and also that I lost a couple hours waiting to enter the Dali show in Philadelphia.



I will comment on some shows later on, but here is a rapid selection
(No, I'm not listing them all) that I'm slating under categories of
personal gradings (and a small comment).



The Bad shows (Category of D):


Laylah Ali (Gallery 303): I think she's quitting the political works and aims to move towards the fantasy world of a Murakami, but she's really not quite there yet with these half-assed kid portraits.

Anthony Caro (Mitchell-Innes & Nash): Colored Indus. metal sculpture never looked so dated, like pop songs from the 80's that are trying hard to beat your cool again, but failing. (added this part a week later: I'm especially critical here of the fact that the new works look not much evolved from the older work)

Jack Pierson (Danziger project): Is he really a New York talk-of-the-town? That show bored me, like attempting to make art out of fashion paper works, but coming out in style with a collage outlook that seems to be "designed" to end as subway ramp posters. Cute, granted, but not moving anywhere across surface.

Aleksandra Mir (Roth Gallery): Good intentions from an artist I usually appreciate, but this time these posters and small objects dedicated to the issues of abortion laws didn't look like they are going to reach their goal. A proof that art can be irrelevant.

Richard Wright (Gagosian): I'm sure it took him hours to draw those op-art meets minimalism frescoes for gagosian, but when I'm entering a gallery I need beef,
not the aperitif for a meal that I'm never going to get. These sparsed works seem to
claim a dialogue with Sol Lewitt, but we are in 2005, not 1975. Bring Ackerman instead.

Jason Fox + Richard Rezac (Feature Inc): 80's neo-figurative gone caricatural. Trendy punk painting that is really not my bag of tea. Rezac is a bit more intriguing with his exploration of sculptural motifs borrowed from the decorative world, but it's not going far with works that are so little as being..well, decorative.





The OK shows (Category of C):


Stephen Vitiello (The Project): Whirling slow-paced sounds of birds, pictures of shooted speakers reminiscent of De Saint-Phalle... Really not his best work, but ok for a 5 minutes rest on some shrink's couch.

Monika Bravo (Bruce Wolkowitz): So sentimental and fluffy, I think her statement outdoes her work. She should just write: "my work are moody and etherial video canvases, take it or leave it".

Isa Genzken (David Zwirner): How did the World Trace Center really affect artists?
Sometimes by influencing them doing lazy works like the new Genzken corpus, which looks exactly how I will describe it: Throwing and glueing a bunch of toys and party accessories on a few columns, splashing paint above it, and sticking a few carboards. If you're into bricolage... The architectural towers at the front space are much more interesting.

Steve McQueen (Marian Goodman): Ho stop the fuss will you? Just a bunch of vignettes with an overtly ambitious (read, pretentious) aim at re-telling the story of the world. Come again? I was wrong, these are appropriated photographs from a NASA experiment at launching images of earth life in space during the 70's. But the pace is slow and you just can't expect your audience to sit for 70 minutes on wood blocks. At any rates, still a couple works (or images) worth a curiosity glance (the red film where he's sculpting his skin), if you got at least one full hour of free time.

Barry Le Va (Ica Of Philadelphia): Ohhh that one is not going to be popular. Hermetic mathematical works on paper, with a few examples of his large sculptural sets, that looks like maquettes of micro-minimalist cities. Read a book
about him and see if you care, before attending.

Paul Rubens (Metropolitan): Is this kitsch or what's wrong with me? If you're into preparatory drawings... I think the Daniel lions are the best, this and the last drawings room, including overtly eery scenes of a marriage.

View Eight (Mary Boone): art that is design that is art that is confusing. Why is it always Jorge Pardo who brings the best work in these sorts of contexts? The Bontecou piece seems really out of place. Ambitious statement, but I think the curator should plunge and organize a museum show with major works.

Thrish Morissey (Yossi Milo): Well I couldn't think of a more "ok" show that this one, which prove its point (punning at conventional family photographs), but is not anymore intriguing than what it is: expectable art, "ok" photographic work, worth a few minutes of your glance.



The Really Good shows (Category of B):


Petah Coyne (both at Sculptural Centre and Lelong Gallery): My idea of a "goth" art.
Sculptures that seem to have been made through some sort of heavy ritualization process you're not certain you want to know about. Both dark, tragic, and beautiful. "A new form of beauty", once said the irish performance band Virgin Prunes, and this shows of waxed natural objects if sort of moving into that direction.

Marc Quinn: Oh well, what an easy pun at classical. But yet it functions. Cast of animal carcasses, if that is going to be one end that Quinn will finally reach through his art. For the moment it still looks fresh.

Log Cabin (Artists Space): One trend of the 80's that is often missed is one good queer related art shows, and this young curator is fulfilling our hunger adequately.
A few very fun works (including a perky comparison of tv biographies between Doris Day and Rock Hudson), and the intrigue of adding that majestuous "Empire" long-run video by Paul Pfeiffer.

Cy Twombly: I have a HARD time with this work. Yet I understand this guy's drama: being at the conjecture of loving abstract yet being confronted by its enemies the minimalists. This show is an intertesting theoretical experience, but at this point you will feel like making your own work at home. Let say someone HAD to do this work and CLAIM these statements, and so Twombly did it, and that was it. The late abstract flowers charm a lot of people in the ar crowds.

Fillipo Lippi To Piero Della Francesca (Metropolitan): About 50 works spanning the Florence and D'Urbino art flourishment in the years surrounding 1450. Quite a short trip but really worth it, especially for the demonstration of early treatments of architecture and background details. The work is mostly religious but average technical skill is fabulous and you will be astonished how the colors and textures of the paint seem so fresh after so many years. Go, really.

T.J. Wilcox (Metro Pictures): You saw the major portion of these at the last Whitney Biennial, but here slated each one with their own projectors, the works are much better served. They are loops ("garlands") of short silent films covering similar topics from one project to the other, poetic documentaries and micro-manifestos. Using both found footage and personal shots of objects or animals, these films present short and seemingly banal fables that flirts with philosophical or political essay. Charming.

Surrealists USA (National Academy School): Just a survey, presenting mostly paintings, and covering the influence of the surrealist movement unto american art,
specifically past the great world wars. Sort of a you-name-it collection, with all the big names present, including some of the originals that moved to USA (Dali, Breton, etc..), and that at the least provide with great education if you get tired of watching all these pictures of dreams gone wrong.

Felix Gonzales-Torres + Joseph Kosuth (Andrea Rosen): Actually, the square floor of liquorice candies from Gonzales-Torres was really lazy for a continuation on his past work, but Kosuth saved the show by his comparative study of literature quotes, journal news articles, and comic strips. A great experience with synthesis.

Wolfgang Volz (Chelsea Museum): don't miss this opportunity to see some other Christo projects magnificently photographed by their personal assistant. The extra landscape works are sometimes lavish, especially the nice shots of russian country.

Logical Conclusion (Pace Wildenstein): 40 Years Of Rule Based Art: a museum worth trip around minimalism and conceptual art, both presenting art from the roots of these movements, and art that was influenced by them. Quite a varied show, presenting mostly works from the usual gallery roaster. They built a few extra walls so expect a packed show, featuring works from Judd, Lewitt, Nauman, Darboven, Holzer, Koons, up to odd additions like Andrea Zittel or.



The Excellent/Fantastic shows (Category of A):

Dali (Museum Of Philadelphia): believe it or not, I underestimated the influence of this artist. I didn't know that pop art and even minimalists are probably coming directly from the guy. Here is a true master, and a must-see show on your year-list, even if you think like me that it is going to be so predictable and annoying that his name gets on everyone's lips again for a while.

Cory Arcangel (Deitch): The new art is punning at the core of digital. This is your top cool-du-moment show, and it will entirely rock your fun. Why this obsession with Mario, specifically? The show doesn't make much more sense than a moustache, but who needs a moustache to make sense anyway, when it's already so entertaining.

Elena Dorfman (Edwynn Houk): Quite emotionally strange photograhs of people living with plastic dolls. Don't expect to simply laugh, it goes much psychologically deeper than that. An artist I'm discovering, but this project is really fascinating and I can't wait to buy the accompanying (french) book, coming out shortly.

Tim Hawkinson (Whitney): One of the top best show in New York presently, featurings many corky, geeky, obsessive artworks, including sculptures made of toenails or hair, or involving insane mechanisms replicating the artist's signature or creating a beatbox out of water drips falling on buckets. I have not even mentioned all the personal body topographics yet, but I'm sure you're already running to see this as I speak.

Norma Jeane (Swiss Institute): You can't be indifferent to a motorcycle rumming at you as closer you approach it, or to a sofa that emanates sexual pheromones. A quick but perfect little (but noisy) show in Soho, entirely worth the detour.

Kim Keever (Feigen Contemporary): the lost romantic lanscapes are re-found at the bottom of dirty old aquariums. Simply amazing.

Christo (Central Park): You've heard enough, right? Yes it's this breezy crazy thing in Central Park that formulates an orange corridor under great winds. If there was ever a work that communicated an impression of abundance, when most art concentrates specifically on the rare and unique, that was it.

Sarah Lucas (Barbara Gladstone): So disappointingly simple, but an impressive re-take on the premiss of arte Povera to reflect on issues of gender tensions, more specifically on the woman body and its constant objectification. Is this feminist art? I don't know. I think of it as sort of a pornography of the banal.

Eugene Meatyard (International Centre Of Photography): Weird photos made in the attic with your kids never looked so artistic. A fine retrospective of his "constructed" world (specifically, his "romance" serie), but a couple other ackward shows as a bonus (the collection of prostitutes photos from a certain Mr. Bellocq, and a quasi embarassing show about racism featuring mostly white artists).

Rudolf Stingel (Paula Cooper): A show more important than being discussed, and that will pass unspoken for. The artist transformed the gallery into a supreme white cube, adding a gigantic painting of the gallerist (replicated from a Robert Mapplethorpe photograph). The gallery gets dirtier as visitors pass by. I think you should go and decide for yourself what statement or issue you think the work is pinpointing.

Sarah Anne Johnson (Julie Saul): a wall patch of photographs depicting canadian forest campers and workers, intermixed with images of the same subjects made with wood dolls, in pittoresque micro-sceneries. Quite an interesting approach to sculpture. Or photography. A great discovery.

Jun Nguyen Hatsushiba (Lehmann-Maupin): Performance art made under the sea and presented on videos in a clubby danceable format. One of these piece featured some sort of common respiratory geometric structure that some kids were holding. I thought that was neat.



Ok...that will be enough for today.

The show I missed the most was a Leigh Bowery survey, but I had to cancel
a few video shows (Bowery included a few films), because after the Steve McQueen experience at Marian Goodman, I realized they take a long time to visit and are not necessarely the best art.



Cheers,


Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com

Sunday, February 20, 2005

In New York

Well...

I'm here in New York.

Saw Christo, saw Hawkinson, saw Arcangel, saw McQueen, saw Quinn, saw Dali....oops....Dali?..yes, went to Philadelphia too.


Let me tell you that I'm already OVERWHELMED!

I must have seen 30 shows in 3 days dammit: Can someone cure me?


Best gallerist is Andrea Rosen.
She's often there when I'm at her gallery.
She seems to be a cool, very approachable person.
I was too shy to go and say "hey Andrea..pick me...I'll
rock your space"...but I'll grant you that her gallery is
a little more risky than average, which means that I think she's
one of those Chelsea gallerists who have some potential of being
"really" aware of where it's at, concerning art trends or choices.


My biggest reproach to Chelsea is that gallerists ar focussing on "objects"
(sculptures and paintings), when it's really not that necessary anymore.

Not if they sell their this art to museums (like they should). Museums are ready
for "art" and are just waiting for gallerists to be ready in their turn and surprise them a little (Andrea does by inviting Felix Gonzales-Torres for a serie of special projects).



I also saw Deitch, the Man. Sounds very relaxed too.
Soho continues to be hot in great part because of him.


I'll come back on some shows later after my return...

Elena Dorfman is a must, so is Hawkinson, Kim Keever, and a weird trio Magritte + Robert Williams + David Lachapelle at Tony Shafrazi.


Christo: I'm going again..it's crazy.

Being here in person made me realize how much of a pilgrimage this whole thing
ressembles. My first impression is that there was a gigantic religious procession being set up, but that I didn't what it was for, and what symbols are signified by the use of a brillant orange ("ambre", if you will).

The base seemed to be made of some sort of hard plastic. You can knock on them and hear the nice sound created by the void (I don't know why I just said that, but I always felt the urge of tapping unto them: read into this whatever you want). The drapes are so thick thy could serve for blankets to the numerous homeless citizens of NYC. Now that's one good idea for recyclage.

The sizes change depending if you are on a small or large path. I never noticed that from the photos.

Basically..it s really a crazy project, but to know it you really gotta cross the park for a minimum of 3 hours walk.


Whatever ..I'm tired...
this text is full of mistakes, cheap words and bad spell,

I'll be back,




Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Furnished: Marianne Corless "Further" at La Centrale.

"Our land is everything to us... I will tell you one of the things we remember on our land. We remember that our grandfathers paid for it - with their lives."
John Wooden Legs, Cheyenne





Ok,

you got until Sunday the 20th to visit yet another of the best Montreal exhibits
since 2005.


Remember how I said recently that BGL stole Marianne Corless's show
at Mercer Union (Toronto)?


Well, the girl took her revenge.

The Centrale gallery show is a total art experience, including tactile environment. A must-see.


I thought colonization was a tired and cliché topic of canadian art, but trust me this doesn't detain at all on Corless's work.

Maybe because she went just that extra limit where other artists wouldn't go,
working with materials that would give an heart attack to Brigitte Bardot.


If you're too sensitive, please evitate this show, but you're missing on a lot
of skiils.


Maybe I'll come back to it, but otherwise it's pretty self-explicative.

Just remember that europeans transmitted variola to native americans, through the trade of contaminated tissues, and that part will help you understand the rest, including how far (indeed, how "further") she links back the responsibility, in the meantime reversing back the process of colonization.

Can culture be contaminative ?


Cheers,


Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com


Marianne Corless "Further"
January 14 to February 20 2005
La Centrale
4296 Saint-Laurent Boulevard
Wednesday: noon - 18h
Thursday, Friday: noon - 21h
Saturday, Sunday: noon - 17h

Mini Mani Mo: "3 X 3: Flavin / Andre / Judd" at Leonard And Bina Ellen Gallery.

"non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem"
William Of Ockham






I'd love this blog to be minimal.


Yesterday I went to see the exhibit "3 X 3: Dan Flavin, Carl André, Donald Judd" at gallery Leonard And Bina Ellen at Concordia University (Montreal).


A selection of 3 works by 3 landmark minimalist artists, all works presented were from the permanent collection of the National Gallery Of Canada in Ottawa.


It was short, nostalgic, but I enjoyed it.


Slick, design-oriented, thoughtprovoking.



Thanks,


Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com




......I can't really leave you this way, can I ?



Is there any such thing as bad minimalist art ?


Tough answer, maybe that is why they are still so many artists
doing it nowadays.


Yet to some, all minimalist art is bad: merely an invention of pedantic snobs laughing at the face of good-intentioned people.


There was a pretty heavy critic of the Bina Ellen show at the Voir journal by general onlookers, so much that I felt an urgency to reply over there, and explain why it is that minimal artists are so important (regardless of personal taste).


To be honest,I don't think that minimal art pieces by themselves are always that fascinating. I believe that what is truly fascinating in minimal art are artists' approaches on the subject, how they were able to focus on very specific points and respect them for a lifetime.


It is true that many of these specific issues are theoretical explorations that could hardly be repeated today (once something is said, it's said), unless in contexts of recyclage by the design industry, a field on which indeed minimalists probably had the greatest influence.


I'm thinking of this obsessive layering down of the basic "mathematics" of art, which was really the most evident here in the works of Dan Flavin and Carl Andre (to keep with the artists selected for this minimal survey).


As I mentioned elsewhere, and as you may all know, minimalists emerged at the convergence of two problematics:

1) Theoretically, aesthetic had been called obsolete (you like blue and I like
yellow, they are no critically pertinent common grounds on this aspect).

2) The industrial world was rapidly dephazing art on the level of material exploration and visual effect.


Therefore, deconstructing aesthetic in its most simple forms, and attempting to reach back the design world by erasing the human touch through the use of industrially fabricated material, became the main concerns of minimalists. Minimalists worked beyond representation, as they were aware that our world was already overwhelmed by it. Through their art they elaborated a thorough critic of the visual, turning back art unto itself, negociating its pertinence. Finding ways to create an art that would be logic, and essentially demonstrating visual parameters of perception, which we experience in everyday life.


In a sense, minimalist art was aiming at becoming "functionalist" art.A sort of strict, supra classical form of art that had an aesthetic purpose: expliciting the materialistic laws of art, not in the sense that it was all that theoretical, but more in the sense that it extended theory into an art that indulged into formulaic researches.


And the best way to experience these "formulations" is when you're able to see many works from one of these minimalists put together. "3 X 3" only permitted 3 works per artist, so I'm tempted to criticize the show from the educational standpoint of what could be learned about each artist from such a limitative context.



Let's see....


Dan Flavin:

Main Interest: Immateriality (How can one make a painting or sculpture out of pure light?).


One work was missing from the Montreal version of this travelling exhibit (Icon IV (the pure land) (to David John Flavin [1933-1962]), 1962-1969). It was required by the National Gallery of Washington for their recent Retrospective of this artist (which, by the way, will feature in my eventual top of the year 2004, something I expect to write somewhere in early march). What we were left with was the famous "Monument 4 For Those Who Have Been Killed In Ambush (To P.K. Who Reminded Me About Death),1966", a fine work but one that was already seen in Montreal during the "Global Village: The 60s" exhibition at Montreal's MFA in late 2003. It's one of those intermittent works of Flavin that attended to other preoccupations than plastic. It is not merely a canvase of light: you are invited to read into the cross format, something menacing that projects towards you. To me it looks like a canon or a hanging pole. The red obviously refers to violence and blood, and it would be ridicule to refute that reading, however literal it might be.

Some could argue that this work is not representative of standard Flavin interests, but it does serve him well as it proposes the audience how much can be said by the assemblage of a few neon lights. By itself, the work is reflective of Flavin's carreer.


The other work, titled "The Nominal Three (To William Of Ockham) (1963 )" couldn't be more representative of either Flavin's art or the aim of minimalist art in general. I have no intention to resume to you here the philosophy behind the "Ockham Razor" theory that it refers to, but let just say that the work itself is simply a demonstration of logical reasoning. It is the minimal format of a series. If you take one white neon, and install two more at a certain distance, it can still mean anything. You can read it in any direction. But if you add another chunk of three neons, at an extra distance, you get a serie, since from logic you can presume that the following set will include 4 neons, and then 5 neons, etc... The problem with minimalist art is that it deals so much with first-sight materiality that people tend to forget that these works sometimes hide such tricks behind their superficial outlook. What I just described sounds obvious to any real art amateur, but a great quantity of spectators don't expect art this demonstrative of its reason to be. Minimalism is a religious art that is fascinated by pure thought and the reductionism of all possibilities.

In all its godly white hermetism, this work just described reminded me that the major aspect lacking from Flavin's art in this exhibition was a work demonstratring his use of multicolored neon lights, and how he used to shape them as being the plastician of light that he was.




Carl André:

Main Interest: the expressive power of objects (what are the different configurations an object can take, between unit and its multiplication?).


carl André is the artist best represented by this exhibit. Not only his assemblage in series of a similar object, sometimes done by hand, is magnificently examplified by his work Lever (a series of 137 white bricks aligned on the floor in a precise row), but with the two copper works we are being demonstrated how André loved to reconfigure a same unit in all sorts of spatial possibilities (and sometimes shifting materials to explore even further visual possibilities). Here we are shown "144 Copper Square (1969)", a floor of 12 x 12 copper thin squares that visitors are invited to walk on, and in a room nearby, "Pile" (1977) , a serious amount of the similar copper squares who are piled up to form a perfect column against the corner. These sculptures look mathematically rigid, yet they are fragile since no units were ever glued or screwed together.

Carl Andre is an artist who is often disliked by the general public for being so radically blunt with his art. That is pretty understandable. In the last two works just mentioned, he is layering down possible mathematical extensions made of thin square in perfect contact with each other: horizontal and vertical. They are a few other possibilities (that he certainly exploited), but his work usually rapidly reach a cul de sac, and so he is forced to shift units. To circumscribe this problem, he also shifts materials as a mean to explore textures and reflection, therefore they are a few versions of the 144 squares floor listed above made with different metals. Now how much can you manage to enjoy x versions of a work that was already boring at first glance? Andre is obviously the least entertaining of the minimalists, but he's also probably the most true at heart with the original philosophy of the movement.


We may be missing a wood sculpture of Andre here, which would have added another layer: the transformation of organic material into fabricated order, and the tensions inherent in these oppositions.



Donald Judd:

Main interest: Identity Of The Object (how can two similar objects also be different?).


Donald Judd is a fantastic artist, perhaps the best of the minimalist. His works seems to scrutinize the materials and shapes of industrial design, synthesizing them into pure forms of art. They seem to emerge, or extend, from architecture, but with such character that soon recall of their autonomy.


The best way to comprehend the power of Judd's work, is to be able to see whole series of physically similar works, and be able to ponder at what differentiate them from one to another, as unique sculptures of art.

The problem with the selection here is that the three pieces, otherwise magnificent, are from very different series, so there is no way that one can "Judd"-ge (pardon the pun) the main focus that the artist conveyed throughout his career.

What is left is the slick look of industrial design, and shapes that almost seem practical, when it's all tricks for the art and meant to be not much more than pleasing to the eye.


Because with Judd comes a real pleasure in shaping things, and how objects (and their colors) cuts out from the space. It's a deliberate audacity at exploring the new materials and shape of the new technological world, and having fun at creating unecessary artefacts recycling the shapes and forms of an essentialist and neccessary approach to design. Judd is the ancestor of techno.


The "Untitled (1963)" wall piece is a pretty large example of a very known series of similar works, this time a copy all made of gavanized iron, with no use of color plexiglass. A sculpture that functions like a zigzag between plain and empty space, as well as rendering the full monolithic graciosity of pure architectural shapes, this sculptures moves even further with theory, in acknowledging that as a whole it is actually formed of a series of similar fragments. But are these fragments really exactly the same? No, they are never, because through the process of perception, you can never see two of them exactly from the same perspective. Dumbfounded yet ? But the best part is that it just look damn sexy.


The two other works "Untitled (1963-1975)" and "Untitled (1964)", also look like portions of architectures or furnitures, recycling the shapes and materials of industrial design into pure abstraction. The latter specifically take the shape of a metallic shelve, or some sort of futuristic post-deco heater, but with a closer look it resolves to be nothing but object-play, physical-play. a "painting of spatial experience" as he would probably prefer that I described. This is the type of works that called out for a future in artmaking, at a time when everybody was pronouncing the death of art, and we only started recently to grasp all the possibilities these artists announced.





The exhibits also presented one or two preparatory or post-facto drawings related
to the exhibit sculptures from each artists, such as a perspective study of Untitled
by Judd, another drawing of a neon work by Flavin, or this poem "Leverwords" by Carl André, which aligns series of 4-letter words as though they were objects deprived of meaning:



Leverwords
(8 February 1966)



beam
clay beam
edge clay beam
grid edge clay beam
bond grid edge clay beam
path bond grid edge clay beam


reef
slab reef
wall slab reef
bead wall slab reef
cell bead wall slab reef
rock cell bead wall slab reef


root
heel root
line heel root
rate line heel root
dike rate line heel root
sill dike rate line heel root


room
time room
hill time room
inch hill time room
rack inch hill time room
mass rack inch hill time room


carl Andre
8 february 1966




In another corner of the room were archives, including books, photos, and even personal letters. I felt stressed to read anything because at this point you are 1 meter away from the counter girl who watch you, probably wondering if you enjoy the show or not, as she must be used to be face so many different reactions.



Overall I consider this exhibition a necessary stop.


Minimalist art might be a dead trend, but not the relation between art and design that it launched.



Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com



"3 X 3: Flavin - Andre - Judd"
January 14 – February 19, 2005
Leonard And Bina Ellen Gallery
1400 de Maisonneuve Blvd
Opening hours:
Tuesday - Saturday 12 pm - 6 pm

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Show Me Your Fish And I'll Show You..: James Prior "Fishing With John James" at Skol Gallery

"Little fish. big fish. Swimming in the water."

PJ Harvey






Last week I saw a show by an artist I had never heard from (I think) named James Prior at Skol Gallery (Montreal), and which was called "Fishing With John James".



It looked like a series of different pieces but apparently,
the artist meant the whole to be an installation, and so
didn't title anything.


Here in details are the seven "stations" that were included:


- One large portrait of an old fisherman sitting in a landscape.


- Another large, quite pittoresque, photograph of same man walking along a woody coast.


- A third large photograph of the inside of a fisherman's camp.


- A full wall patch of at least 60 photographs of different sizes and resolution, showing fishermen holding their fish captures, with related images (the more you watch this, the more you realize the photographs often represent the same people).


- A large collector's glass cabinet showing items pertaining to fishing activity, from a boat motor to a small canoe oar, to fishing lines to a plethora of fish hooks of all sizes and origins.


- A video installation of 6 or 7 "besided" monitors showing loops of boat motors eitheir in full stop or motion.



What to make out of all this?


Here are key terms: Male | Fish | Identity | Stereotype | April's Fool



The images of a dozen men showing their fishes should already speak for themselves. There is something homoerotic about this work, though I'm not certain this was the artist's intention. But what was the most interesting function of this exhibit, is the way it fabricated narratives from the adjointment of personal photographic archives from a real hardcast fisherman (named George Riddell), with a few "artificial ones", specifically shot for this show.


Throughout this assemblage we are welcomed to create in our mind the ideal
identity of a non-existing character, John James: the ultimate, the absolute,
Mr. Fisherman.



Most, if not all, of the photographs are pictures of our original fisherman and his friends, transformed here into archetypes of identity. Archetypes not only of men, but also of photography, since all these photos represent different periods of recent history.


How did these "real men" managed to stay so exact to themselves throughout all these years ?

What is this portrait on manhood that Prior is proposing us, and how do we respond to
it, especially now that fishes are momentarely magnified , thanks to art, as extentions of masculine identity?


By insisting on this male bonding activity of photographing fish captures as being a common expression of masculine pride, Prior seems to aim at unleashing the hidden mechanisms at the bottom rock formation of male chauvinism. The question is open-ended as far as what fishes may represent symbolically, either as objects connotative to sexuality or linking back to an idiom of self-foolishness.

You are free to decide in the end: men are either predators or prey, of themselves...



Please invite your dad or uncle to this
show (if it settles iself somewhere else). It was really meant for them. I dare say that this exhibit hits so good that it will never make you see the activity of fishing the same way again.


The hooks in the cabinet, sort of installed in the shape of an ancient natural history curio, all looked like over-used tools representing as many failed attempts at capturing gender identity: let it all hang out sort-of drill. Or was it that it represented how the false images that replaced it are so firmly pierced in?


The outboard motors on the video monitors seem to be fueling on testosterone, fighting for some pride concourse: which can rumble the best or the longest. To me they looked like video-fountains, and I surprised myself to find their arched panoramic view quite relaxing.


There is nothing to say against this exhibit, apart from
the fact that I feel I'm gonna have to wait that museums
buy some of the works to get their titles right.


The only minus to the A tag that Chris Zeke himself gave to this show, is that it's not exactly the first time that the theme of fishing and male identity is brought up together.


I can think of various loose examples, but one worthy of mentioning is the maritime artist whom I'm so forgetting his name right now, and have no idea what is up to these days, but used to play out themes of gay identity with many campy works using mediums and images related to fishing culture. He had a show at B-312 in the late 90's. It will come back to me soon (this part is pending to be edited).


But Prior's work is first and foremost a terrific essay on the photographic territory
of identity.



Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com


James Prior
"Fishing With John James"
14 January - 12 February 2005
Skol Gallery
372, rue Sainte-Catherine Ouest
espace 314

Saturday, February 12, 2005

Tango With Christo






Today is the birth of the most recent project by Christo and longtime companion, Jeanne-Claude, in Central Park, New York.

You've heard about it.

It's called The Gates.

You got 15 days left to attend.

Be there or be squared (I'm going soon).


Cheers,

Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com


PS: Here is a cool slide show curtesy of New York Times, in case you are going to miss it from this very cool page of articles.

Friday, February 11, 2005

Indoor Marathon

Please visit Skol Gallery and say hi
to Jean-Jules Soucy, the artist responsible for the Saguenay "Baie Des Ha-Has" pyramid and many other extravaganzas, while he is working out his indoor marathon, travelling on a still bicycle all the kilometers needed to cross Canada from his native "Baie Des Ha-Has", a place where he complains none of the big art stars ever visit, to the edge of BC, and then perhaps even across the world.

He would explain it to you better than me.

He's a very sweet guy, don't be shy to talk to him.


Once the necessary kilometers are done, he's moving to a next stop.

I know he'll be in Toronto soon but I don't know exactly where.
Please ask and provide the info here.


In the meantime, you got until tomorrow to visit
the joyful exhibit by James Prior at the same place, a fantastic play
on photo-documentation, and male stereotypes, that I firmly
advise you to see (I'll try to come back on it).


There's also the Frederic Lavoie exhibit at B-312 which is not
bad at all (also ending tomorrow). Stay a while before judging.
Valérie Blass got also a nifty video piece, stealing from the focus
of her own show.


I've seen a few exhibits recently (Oboro, Circa, Dazibao, Vox, Bina Ellen,
that Egyptian show, etc..). I got about 3 articles that I need polish before
posting, but I'm always so busy.


Let's just say for now that I think the most important Montreal
exhibit these days is the minimalist show, ending in about a week at Leonard
And Bina Ellen.

Between Egypt and Kentridge, please try a visit. It's really short,
but the best you'll have until someone over here thinks of providing
a decent retrospective.





Cheers,

Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com

Monday, February 07, 2005

Blog World

There's got to be at least one post a week from
me on this thing.


What have I done this past week?

Done art, worked, saw a couple shows,
and answered many other blogs
(including some other Simpleposies)



Here is a quote from an artist I always admired, named Tom Ellard
(of early electronic band Severed Heads, who's been working with film score
lately, and still in 2005 creating the videos accompanying his own music:
all info on his website: )


You can't have dialog with a blog. One person is 'on stage' and the rest are 'the audience'. Even with links and responses, blogs enforce a unequal conversation between the person doing the asserting - the performer, and the rest. They can only set up their own stages and thus blogs multiply as people errect their own stages. Eventually when all these people have stages they may as well have set up a mailing list.

We all spent a long time trying to break down the stage, but the 'kids' are
busy building it up again. Let them, they will spend their lives trying to
be celebrities and maybe their children will despise them and reinvent the
notion of community.


Tom Ellard

(the quote is from the mailing list from his site, a forum of discussion
on mostly, electronic music and computer geer)



Of course I replied to him, saying
that blog can be purposeful depending
on how much it is focussed, and certainly
an interesting medium for artistic explorations.


Blogs are autistic and suit me very well:
they provide with self-channelling and
exactitude in the task of archiving.



Cheers,


Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com