« nice turtle | Main | Congrats Claudzilla! »
February 12, 2006
"Painting In Tongues" la moca show
"Painting In Tongues"
I saw this show and felt at a complete loss to find a clear connection among the title, the work, and the curatorial statement as written in the press release. Maybe I just hate painters' freedom, but I thought this show was confusing and frustrating.
First, I am not sure why it is called a "survey", since it only shows work by seven artists. Second, why did Kai Althoff need a smelly, dirty, hotel carpet/bad lighting in the space? Third, why were the all the works by each artist hung in discrete sections -- as opposed to intermingling them in the space where they might have some chance of sparking a conversation about the topic at hand. (non-painting paintings) Is that curatorial decision part of the idea of "survey"- as in a mini-survey of each artist?
That said, there were a few nice moments in the show-some Ivan Morely's paintings seemed to work in conjunction with the Masters of American Comics show, and personally made me yearn for my redneck youth. Gillian Carnegie made a small painting of a fall-season tree that was lovely. The tree was bursting and dying all at once. I am very excited about inventive tree painting after seeing the Cezanne Pisarro show at LACMA, so this little piece is very timely. Carnegie had several other paintings of trees and landscape which revealed an interest in manipulating paint in different ways from one painting to the next. These paintings worked together as a group very nicely.
Actually, I think if many of these works were not struggling to fit under the rubric of "painting"(in tongues) they might break free and become something interesting. Artists, especially painters, get boxed into styles and "signature" techniques fairly quickly. This may happen because painting is hard, and sometimes a long and tenacious time to develop a style that is truly compelling. I think the deeper problem, however, is the market's reliance on style over content or concept.
Every artist I know makes different types of things. (THANK GOD!) Some painters make sculptures, drawings or videos or installations or beautiful frosted fake birthday cakes. So why call them paintings? I applaud the idea of having show which embraces the artist who works with ideas and allows the medium or technique to follow the concept. However, the title of the show and the efforts of the curator are at odds. The show suggests that artists are breaking free from the constraints of style, form and medium--but every thing made by a painter still has to be called a PAINTING?
If you saw this show and liked it, please respond and tell me why I am a dumbass. If you haven't seen the show, go see it and tell me what you think. There are three other shows up-Karl Haendel, Masters of American Comics & After Cezanne. Check out the R Crumb drawings--I know, I know, everyone loves R Crumb--but the drawings and studies are truly transcendent.
PRESS RELEASE
PAINTING IN TONGUES
01.29.06 - 04.17.06
This survey examines the work of seven international emerging artists who have embraced a novel and challenging approach to painting. By employing a varied mix of painterly styles, modes, sources, and materials, as well as working against a single recognizable �hand,� the featured artists have each crafted a complex and rich practice that offers innumerable avenues for exploration and growth. The artists�Kai Althoff, Gillian Carnegie, Mark Grotjahn, Lucy McKenzie, Rodney McMillian, Ivan Morley, and Anselm Reyle�are guided by a variety of individual motivations and conceptual frameworks rather than the outward appearances of their canvases. The exhibition is curated by MOCA Assistant Curator Michael Darling and is accompanied by a fully illustrated catalogue.
Posted by vaderrove08 at February 12, 2006 07:41 PM
Comments
meow!
Posted by: meow at February 21, 2006 08:52 AM
I am going to see it this weekend. Will report back.
Posted by: buttergun at February 21, 2006 10:07 AM
why isn't this working...
Posted by: test at February 21, 2006 12:22 PM
I am positively swooning over the mark grotjon (sp) paintings. I am obsessed with the thick butterfly paintings with the 1/2 layer of oil on them. They really take me there. I was daydreaming today about making a painting similar to a kids painting style with brightly colored crayons underneath, and then you paint ink on the surface and scratch it off. I thought the many lines paintings of mark's were reminiscent of that. I was at Bart Esposito's studio yesterday and I was talking to his friend Mario ____________ (don't know his last name) about marks paintings and the masks in particular, and he said that he thought the masks referred to modernism and like picasso appropriating african masks in his work.. I found that sort of shocking and plausible. I imagine Mark is aware of this because he is a really thoughtful and sensitive guy when it comes to paintings.. Also the gambling references I found funny because he shows at blum and poe and last time I was in the back at B + P, jeff was playing online poker and gambling with real money..
Posted by: kristin at February 21, 2006 12:23 PM
ET is cool
Posted by: kristin at May 19, 2006 01:37 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)